Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Why Are Some Boxers Bashed For "Running" and Others Praised
FightHype Community > BOXING HYPE > Boxing
Jack 1000
I had a great post prepared but lost it in transition so I will recap some open ended questions for the board:

Why is it that some fighters were/are praised for running as an effective strategy and others are bashed for it? For example, when Jersey Joe Walcott fought Joe Louis the first time, Walcott was encouraged by the crowd, and his corner to "coast" (run) in the last 3 rounds. Walcott lost a close and controversial decision. Why is Delahoya criticized for employing the same strategy against Trinidad? Ali also did a lot of little jabbing and running and Cosell would be all over his nuts, just as bad as Lampley calling a Delahoya fight. Historically, the great Willie Pep won bouts by often backpedaling for often whole rounds without even throwing a punch. Pernell Whitaker did a lot of running as well, but it won him fights.

Open ended questions:

1.) How do you define a fighter "running" vs. "masterful boxing?"

2.) Why wasn't (isn't) Gil Clancy bashed more for telling Delahoya to "run" in the final rounds against Trinidad? Isn't it the trainers fault for employing that strategy on the fighter? No one bashes Clancy, why?

3.) How come Hector Camacho is not bashed more for turning into a sprinter after the terrible split decision he got against Edwin Rosario, where Hector did very little after the 5th round when he was out on his feet? Delahoya showed better boxing at least for the entire first half of the Trinidad fight than anything Camacho did from the 5th round on against Rosario.

4.) Pernell Whitaker ran and jabbed and it won him fights, Roy Jones in his prime moved great and it was "masterful boxing." allowing him to win fights. But everyone shits on Delahoya against Tito for running when Louis (vs Walcott I), Leonard (many fights), Pep (many fights) did the same things and won. Larry Holmes would jab and often run and it won him fights as well. Why for years is all we hear about Trinidad-Delahoya? Yes, Oscar lost a close decision to Tito, but is this a close fight that is over-rated for what it produced? Why is it that other good to great fighters in history aren't bashed for running strategies? Or are we failing to draw the line between running and elusive boxing?

Jack

King Eugene
I'll share my thoughts on that:

Question first...isn't running when your just trying to avoid punishment or punches with returning little to no workrate/punches in return (atleast punches with bad intentions anyway and not back off me punches) and isn't masterful boxing being allusive, being able to hit/deliver hard shots without getting hit, be slick and make other opponents miss, control the pace of the fight, and so on...? Please correct me if I'm wrong but thats what I've always been brought up to believe.

As far as DLH, yea you can get on his cornerman for making the decision and him being a smart disciplined fighter he was going to listen to what his corner tells him to do. Should people get on his corner more than him....Yea. The thing about it is he is in the ring and his corner men aren't so ultimately he followed through with that decision. Honestly I dont care about that particular fight but you, me, and everybody else knows that DLH wont "RUN" from nobody during a fight.

As far as those other boxers you named, I don't consider their style as running, I consider it as smart boxing. They all out thought, out boxed, out worked (as far as ring movement), and out pointed their opposition. Hell most of the time they broke their opponents down with frustration cause of this strategy and ended up knocking them out. Now if anybody thinks ALI was really a runner then I'm a need for them to watch his marathons that be coming on ESPN Classics.

Everybody knows boxing isn't all about going in their face first, seeing who can take the best shots, and who will get knocked out first, people have game plans and strategys. So I wouldnt call all those boxers "Runners" I'd called them strategist! Hell cant knock them, they won with it right? Until they eventually got caught. LMAO (and nobody better not say nothing about Roy LOL!!!)
ROLL DEEP
QUOTE(Jack 1000 @ Aug 27 2008, 01:46 AM) [snapback]402093[/snapback]
I had a great post prepared but lost it in transition so I will recap some open ended questions for the board:

Why is it that some fighters were/are praised for running as an effective strategy and others are bashed for it? For example, when Jersey Joe Walcott fought Joe Louis the first time, Walcott was encouraged by the crowd, and his corner to "coast" (run) in the last 3 rounds. Walcott lost a close and controversial decision. Why is Delahoya criticized for employing the same strategy against Trinidad? Ali also did a lot of little jabbing and running and Cosell would be all over his nuts, just as bad as Lampley calling a Delahoya fight. Historically, the great Willie Pep won bouts by often backpedaling for often whole rounds without even throwing a punch. Pernell Whitaker did a lot of running as well, but it won him fights.

Open ended questions:

1.) How do you define a fighter "running" vs. "masterful boxing?"

2.) Why wasn't (isn't) Gil Clancy bashed more for telling Delahoya to "run" in the final rounds against Trinidad? Isn't it the trainers fault for employing that strategy on the fighter? No one bashes Clancy, why?

3.) How come Hector Camacho is not bashed more for turning into a sprinter after the terrible split decision he got against Edwin Rosario, where Hector did very little after the 5th round when he was out on his feet? Delahoya showed better boxing at least for the entire first half of the Trinidad fight than anything Camacho did from the 5th round on against Rosario.

4.) Pernell Whitaker ran and jabbed and it won him fights, Roy Jones in his prime moved great and it was "masterful boxing." allowing him to win fights. But everyone shits on Delahoya against Tito for running when Louis (vs Walcott I), Leonard (many fights), Pep (many fights) did the same things and won. Larry Holmes would jab and often run and it won him fights as well. Why for years is all we hear about Trinidad-Delahoya? Yes, Oscar lost a close decision to Tito, but is this a close fight that is over-rated for what it produced? Why is it that other good to great fighters in history aren't bashed for running strategies? Or are we failing to draw the line between running and elusive boxing?

Jack



The difference imo, between running and masterful boxing is the 'boxing' part.


If you've got a boxer who's on the backfoot, not throwing anything back and is jsut looking to avoid punches, then that's running.

If they're on the backfoot, avoiding punches but looking for a counter punch or to set up a counter punch, then I'd say that's boxing. If they're blocking, slipping and rolling out the way, thats masterful boxing....if they're just jumping back and circling around, with nothing coming back....that's running.


I don't know why some boxers get away with it whereas some don't..........
Mean Mister Mustard
That's right, there's a difference between running and sticking and moving. For example, Mayweather against Castillo was sticking and moving except in the last rounds where he literally ran. DLH in the last rounds against Trinidad ran.

I also think people root for a boxer when he's giving a boxing lesson to an invincible fighter or a tough guy who hasn't lost in a while. Think Leonard-Hagler. But if a guy fights like that all the time then people start getting pissed and hate him.
rusty_trombone
Actually, I really think it boils down to what most people personally feel about a fighter. If the guy isn't a trash talker and inspire hatred in you, then they like him when he "outclasses" an opponent, but if the guy trash talks like Paulie Malignaggi or Floyd, then they win fights by running like bitches. I guarantee if Margarito was to win his next fight by "running" or "boxing" like Floyd, his fans wouldn't say dick about it, and neither would anyone else, cause Tony is such a "humble guy, with all the spit and vinegar to back it up, he just fights." It's all people's personal biases toward certain fighters and certain styles.
rusty_trombone
QUOTE(Mean Mister Mustard @ Aug 27 2008, 01:55 PM) [snapback]402162[/snapback]
I also think people root for a boxer when he's giving a boxing lesson to an invincible fighter or a tough guy who hasn't lost in a while. Think Leonard-Hagler. But if a guy fights like that all the time then people start getting pissed and hate him.

Case in point, Leonard jews Hagler out of a fight, and is celebrated for it, while Floyd won more convincingly and easier against DLH, but gets lampooned for it. Not that DLH is invincible or a tough guy, but still a guy who Floyd probably shouldn't have fought, especially at that weight class.
GMAN73
QUOTE(rusty_trombone @ Aug 27 2008, 06:04 PM) [snapback]402221[/snapback]
Actually, I really think it boils down to what most people personally feel about a fighter. If the guy isn't a trash talker and inspire hatred in you, then they like him when he "outclasses" an opponent, but if the guy trash talks like Paulie Malignaggi or Floyd, then they win fights by running like bitches. I guarantee if Margarito was to win his next fight by "running" or "boxing" like Floyd, his fans wouldn't say dick about it, and neither would anyone else, cause Tony is such a "humble guy, with all the spit and vinegar to back it up, he just fights." It's all people's personal biases toward certain fighters and certain styles.


I agree totally, people's personal feelings get in the way when they are speaking about fighters. I am perplexed why on every forum there are so many people who personally dislike DLH and bash him so deeply, without giving him a drop of credit.

DLH gave Trinidad a boxing lesson for 9 rounds and moved out of harms way for the final 3. Tito didn't even land in those final rounds, yet I still hearing people saying DLH was scared of Tito.

I don't think some fans are objective at all, and they really like who and what they want to, and seem to do anything to bash something different.
neophyte7
Cotto in his fights against Ndou and Shane Mosley did a great deal of moving and not much fighting in the last 3- 4rounds yet he was praised... no criticism, yet Mayweather and Hopkins are bashed continously for employing movement even when it used strategically to get a fighter in pursuit to lay traps.. This was evident in Mayweather vs Hatton and Hopkins vs Trinidad... There were times in the Tito fight where Hopkins was booed early for employing movement. As stated up above. often times it depends upon your feelings against a fighter. Mayweather did not run against Castillo in either fight, as a matter of fact Mayweather had moments in each fight where he sat down with the bigger man in the pocket. Running does take place in bouts and it is obvious when it is running- DLH ran from Tito-- it was evident -- I have to beg to differ with regard to Pernell--- he was not a runner. A mover yes, runner, hello no... Hector Camacho... there were several of his fights where he was a runner, yet he still had great boxing ability, but if you were to pull a catalogue of his fights you would note he ran on many occassions in the ring
Mean Mister Mustard
QUOTE(neophyte7 @ Aug 27 2008, 09:10 PM) [snapback]402243[/snapback]
Cotto in his fights against Ndou and Shane Mosley did a great deal of moving and not much fighting in the last 3- 4rounds yet he was praised... no criticism, yet Mayweather and Hopkins are bashed continously for employing movement even when it used strategically to get a fighter in pursuit to lay traps.. This was evident in Mayweather vs Hatton and Hopkins vs Trinidad... There were times in the Tito fight where Hopkins was booed early for employing movement. As stated up above. often times it depends upon your feelings against a fighter. Mayweather did not run against Castillo in either fight, as a matter of fact Mayweather had moments in each fight where he sat down with the bigger man in the pocket. Running does take place in bouts and it is obvious when it is running- DLH ran from Tito-- it was evident -- I have to beg to differ with regard to Pernell--- he was not a runner. A mover yes, runner, hello no... Hector Camacho... there were several of his fights where he was a runner, yet he still had great boxing ability, but if you were to pull a catalogue of his fights you would note he ran on many occassions in the ring


In hopkins-Trinidad the only people booing were the Puerto Ricans because Hopkins kept getting out of harms way.
MarzB
I am perplexed why on every forum there are so many people who personally dislike DLH and bash him so deeply, without giving him a drop of credit.


Not true, Dela Hoya has a good jab and left hook but he's criticized because he deserves it. Whether it's his match making, utterly hypocritical comments or down right lying.

Now to the topic at hand as someone said it depends on people's perception of the boxer. I think its pretty lame to say, "well if they talk it they should do it in the ring". Thats like a sports team saying they're going to "crush them" and they employ a screen passes, passing underneath and pounding the ball short distances using up the clock to win. What matters in the end is the score on the score board.

From a strategic standpoint, staying in and trading punches isn't smart boxing, it's barbaric strategy and quite stupid. I like a shootout like the next guy but the smarter boxers are the ones that know when to pick their spots.

To me theres movement and then theres running. The distinction between the two is that "running is" running without zero purpose mainly to avoid. Movement is moving to put you in a position to employ your strategy doing something the other guy doesn't WANT to do.

An excellent example of running is Andre Dirrell vs. Curtis Stevens. I believe that was on the Malignaggi vs. Ndou undercard. That was Oscar Dela Hoya vs. Trinidad last half of the fight the entire fight.

I was having this same discussion as it related to football and I mentioned is Barry Sanders less of a back because he didn't pound the ball like Earl Campbell?? You do whats best for your skill set .
King Eugene
QUOTE(MarzB @ Aug 27 2008, 11:08 PM) [snapback]402254[/snapback]
I am perplexed why on every forum there are so many people who personally dislike DLH and bash him so deeply, without giving him a drop of credit.


Not true, Dela Hoya has a good jab and left hook but he's criticized because he deserves it. Whether it's his match making, utterly hypocritical comments or down right lying.

Now to the topic at hand as someone said it depends on people's perception of the boxer. I think its pretty lame to say, "well if they talk it they should do it in the ring". Thats like a sports team saying they're going to "crush them" and they employ a screen passes, passing underneath and pounding the ball short distances using up the clock to win. What matters in the end is the score on the score board.

From a strategic standpoint, staying in and trading punches isn't smart boxing, it's barbaric strategy and quite stupid. I like a shootout like the next guy but the smarter boxers are the ones that know when to pick their spots.

To me theres movement and then theres running. The distinction between the two is that "running is" running without zero purpose mainly to avoid. Movement is moving to put you in a position to employ your strategy doing something the other guy doesn't WANT to do.

An excellent example of running is Andre Dirrell vs. Curtis Stevens. I believe that was on the Malignaggi vs. Ndou undercard. That was Oscar Dela Hoya vs. Trinidad last half of the fight the entire fight.

I was having this same discussion as it related to football and I mentioned is Barry Sanders less of a back because he didn't pound the ball like Earl Campbell?? You do whats best for your skill set .

Very well put!
BigG
I think when you just want to survive the round or you want the round to just end and you run and clinch without really throwing a jab or anything, thats running. But moving around the ring to avoid punches, disrupt your opponents offense, using your jab, basically trying to outpoint your opponent then yeah thats boxing. Hey this is boxing, if you really cant fight inside with your opponent then you have to use your brains and find another way (outside fighting). This is a fight but also chessmatch.

JonnyBlaze
QUOTE(biggeorge89 @ Aug 27 2008, 10:48 PM) [snapback]402266[/snapback]
I think when you just want to survive the round or you want the round to just end and you run and clinch without really throwing a jab or anything, thats running. But moving around the ring to avoid punches, disrupt your opponents offense, using your jab, basically trying to outpoint your opponent then yeah thats boxing. Hey this is boxing, if you really cant fight inside with your opponent then you have to use your brains and find another way (outside fighting). This is a fight but also chessmatch.

Your post makes me think of John Ruiz..The master of the clinch!!You'd think the dude was gay for how much he loved having his arms around other guys..hahaha..He was trying to start sausage fests while his opponents were trying to kill him..He has been fighting more these days though and he fought in the beginning of his career..Does anyone know of any youtube video of Stoney flipping out on Randy Newman during the Golota fight??"What a peice of shit you turned out to be,what a fuckin peice of shit!!You got no balls you cock sucker!!"..hahahaha..I'll never forget that..Classic shit..Then he goes to Don King after he gets kicked out and says the fight was fixed..

Running is not wanting to be in the ring..

Masterful boxing is being able to follow the true definition of boxing---hit and don't get hit..Willie Pep was a masterful boxer..Definitely one of the best boxers..
MarzB
I thought of Ruiz too on the last post. Call me crazy but I'm rooting for Ruiz against that freak show and thought he beat him the first time. Like I mentined in my last post, you do whats best for your skill set. I'm not a fan of Ruiz's style but it's effective for him and it's up to his opposition to NOT get caught up in that (a'la Jones).

Clinching just like running are parts of boxing. I'll explain to you someone who employed both well that being Bernard Hopkins in the Winky Wright fight. He was on his bike at times allowing Winky to be the pursuer and frustrating him with his hit and clinching/hold style. It wasn't pretty but it was effective.

I think like any style it becomes a problem when its too excessive (ie:ruiz and the holding)
King Eugene
QUOTE(JonnyBlaze @ Aug 28 2008, 12:27 AM) [snapback]402272[/snapback]
John Ruiz..The master of the clinch!!You'd think the dude was gay for how much he loved having his arms around other guys..hahaha..He was trying to start sausage fests while his opponents were trying to kill him

LMBO haha.gif
Man you a trip!
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2014 Invision Power Services, Inc.