Maybe. When you watch Barrera,Morales, Mayweather, Pacquiao fight, it is pure art.Posted February 4, 2014 12:13 pm
Different styles make great fights..nobody wants to see every fight the same way,cookie cutters boxing matches.But the slick boxer will beat the brawler 99 times out of 100.Posted February 4, 2014 9:07 am
yeah too total garbage article and really unbecoming if east side. as an east side regular i dont like to see this kind of writing concerning errant interpretations of boxing and what it is in general.
dana white should start a bixing division of the ufc. instantaneously be rid of the sanctioning bodies, corrupt promoters, corrupt judges, corrupt fighters not fighting the best at champion andcontender level, this kind of system would chew floyd up and spit him out. be a meat grinderPosted February 3, 2014 10:43 am
This article is utter tripe and almost seems to suggest that its okay to foul if you are a slickster but if you are a brawler it is not. Also this word skill is misused. Duran for instance was a brawler (which I regard as someone who loves to fight ad exchange punches) but he had skills that some supposed slick skilful fighters could only dream of (standing right in the pocket and making opponents miss or land with diminished effect),.Posted February 3, 2014 8:47 am
Maybe you should go and watch golf instead.Posted February 3, 2014 4:07 am
We need to make a distinction between brawlers and foulers…
Brawling can describe the style of someone who fights very hard at close quarters—and is willing to absorb punches to get his own in—such as: Ketchell, Dillon, Dempsey, Greb, Frazier, Tyson, Gatti, Pryor, Calzaghe, Maidana and others…
Brawlers were some of the biggest box office sensations in Boxing History. John L Sullivan was the biggest draw of London Prize Rules days. Jack Dempsey was a bigger draw than Gene Tunney… Tyson out drew Holyfield.
Brawlers are sometimes cleaner fighters than their slicker boxing counterparts … There’s a place in Boxing for all styles—but not for flagrant foulers.
Holyfield and Lewis were two of the biggest rule breakers in boxing history. Lewis was a flagrant hold-and-hit specialist — and Holy was a slick head knocker.
Sometimes referee are bought off… Boxing is a very corrupt sport…
When I see over a hundred fouls committed in a fight—and no fouls called—I tend to believe the referee had an agreement with one team to not call any fouls. One boxer doesn’t realize no fouls will be called, so he’s badly damaged before he starts to respond with his own fouling … and he may not be as practiced in the evil arts of fouling.Posted February 3, 2014 2:38 am
I love watching Vladimir and Vitali Klitschko fight, also love Kovalev, Provodnikov, Pac, Stevenson, Golovkin uses fantastic technique while being aggressive, but he stays smart. Ward will only fight in his home town with his personal referee, judges, boxing commission, etc., Ward is boring, elbows, head butts, low blows, can’t wait to see Lomachenko, I think he will stop Salido to win the title in only his first pro fight!!! Hopkins? He is a sick joke, lost to Dawson, holds, low blows, etc., boring as Hell. Hopkins refused to fight kovalev when Kovalev was his mandatory, so Kovalev fought Cleverly to win the WBO title……….Hopkins said he would never fight Kovalev or Stevenson…………..gee………I wonder why?Posted February 3, 2014 1:20 am
Harry greb lost his title blind in one eye to flowers. It is wrong to compare fighter from different eras. greb had a lot of boxing matches.Posted February 2, 2014 11:38 pm
testPosted February 2, 2014 11:36 pm
No, the problem with modern boxing are boxing snobs and geeks who think pot-shotting and shoulder-rolling is the epitome and highest form of boxing. I assure you it is not. If you go back and watch SRR, Duran, Hagler, etc… They didn’t just pot-shot, but they could fight offensively and defensively.Posted February 2, 2014 11:32 pm
*testing any boxer not texting. i hate this new iphonePosted February 2, 2014 10:37 pm
brawlers enrich the sweet science by adding diversity in styles and texting any boxer. brawlers have given us some real gems in fights through the years. winning or making a very good fight with an opponent. dirty fighters are dirty fighters and they exist in any style be it boxer, boxer puncher, counter fighter, or brawler. hopkins is generally recognized as the dirtiest and is on the top of most peoples lists.
this article is praising and nut hugging of the fighters this thinks are the best practitioners of the sweet science and that is something totally and 100% subjective. this is not speaking in facts. it also downtalks people who are not like them stylistically again i think its garbage. i prefer the entertainment provodnikov brought us over anything bernard has. i prefer kovalev over anythin bernard and ward have done. i prefer the opposite of fighters this guy listed. real offensive fighters like klitschkos, pacman, 3g, kovalev, martinez, mathyse, adonis, provodnikov, canelo, old donaire, etcPosted February 2, 2014 10:32 pm
Brawling hurts the sweet science? Well yea, mindless brawling hurts the sweet, science. Tell me something I dont know.Posted February 2, 2014 9:51 pm
The problem is modern boxing is that so-called fans don’t appreciate the true concept of the sport. The current MMA culture and the lower attention span has fans wanting to see fighter hit each other like Rock-em Sock-em robots. No skills, no technique, no ring IQ, because that takes too long and slows the fight down. True boxing fans know that the best in the business used these to their advantage and dominate because of it. Back in the day, pure boxers were worshiped.Posted February 2, 2014 8:52 pm
Are we talking brawling or dirty fights here:
When you say brawlers, the aggressive pressure style I think of is Manny Pacquiao, “Iron” Mike Tyson, Joe “smoking” Frazier, Roberto “Hands Of Stone” Duran, Julio Cesar Chavez, Marvin Hagler, Rocky Marciano, Sandy Saddler, Henry Armstrong, Harry Greb, and Jack “the Manassa Mauler” Dempsey.
But if your talking dirtiest boxing matches the Saddler – Pep fights still tops the list. There was also the Pacquiao – Sanchez, Mayweather – Ortiz sucker punch, Holyfield – Tyson, Hopkins – Echols, Davis – Zivic, Butler – Grant, Nova – Galento, Pedroza – LaPorte, and Fullmer – Diardello to name a few.
I also recall reading about a savage welterweight champion by the name of Billy Smith nicknamed “Mysterious Bill Smith,” who fought during the late 1800′s. According to boxing history, his foul tactics included knees, head, elbows, teeth, hip throws, biting ears off, and stepping on his opponent’s face.Posted February 2, 2014 8:48 pm
Btw, I posted the last two comments–forgot to type my name!Posted February 2, 2014 6:19 pm
Martin, if Strauss had another meaning for “brawler” than the type of boxer it normally refers to, he should have been very clear about that. But I don’t think he did. It’s a lame article written out of ignorance of the sport.Posted February 2, 2014 6:18 pm
“What a horrible and garbage article.”
Ditto. And what an insult this article is to avid and knowledgable boxing fans.Posted February 2, 2014 6:12 pm
BEARS ur are right boxing is made of styles u all know this styles make fights!!! sweet science is to hit and not get hit it does not say hit and runPosted February 2, 2014 6:05 pm
agree with marten on cortesPosted February 2, 2014 4:53 pm
All great fighters fought dirty. From holding peoples heads down, grabbing behind the head, hitting and holding, hitting behind the head, hitting below the belt when the ref is on the opposite side. It is all part of the game. This is a fight, not a hugging or kissing contestPosted February 2, 2014 4:37 pm
I only read the title and that was enuf.
Slowly I developed a taste for pure boxing aswell, it never sidelined me to just one category but a appreciation for all styles in the game.
A brawl will allways get fans on their feet and cheering more than a tactical chess match, it is what it is and nobody can change that fact with agruments and optical allusions.
As long as a pure boxer throws a lot of punches and puts on a showcased event it to can be exciting.Posted February 2, 2014 4:03 pm
Ooop, sorry: bit of a tangent there!Posted February 2, 2014 3:59 pm
Bloody hell: Philip Seymour Hoffman is dead. He was 46.Posted February 2, 2014 3:59 pm
I think the author makes some good points, but the emphasis should be more on bad and biased refereeing than “brawling”.
Also, the writer appears to let dirty fighters who are “clever” and “skilful” enough to get away with it off the hook, and is really only complaining about the ones who do it in full view of the referee.
He also writes as if “great” fighters should be able to get away with it, since they also bring lots of “sweet science” to the table. However, I agree with some of those below who say that it’s precisely the likes of Hopkins who, by using dirty tactics “cleverly”, not only get away with cheating, but also turn what would otherwise be good fights into ugly and boring ones.
About bad and biased refereeing, take the example of Joe Cortez. When Hatton fought Mayweather, Cortez wouldn’t let Hatton get in close at all (where he needed to be to land his shots). “You’re holding Ricky, stop holding Ricky!” he kept saying, when all Hatton was doing was trying to get on the inside, and (as far as I could see) not holding at all. Meanwhile, he let Mayweather get away with even trick in the book, completely ignoring his constant use of the elbow and forearm in Hatton’s face.
So, you might think Cortez is just a referee who likes to keep fighters at a distance, and is quick to penalise those who clinch and hold. But then when he refereed Calzaghe versus Hopkins (not long after), Hopkins really *was* holding, clinching and hugging, yet Cortez didn’t warn him about it at all, and even failed to warn Hopkins for walking in with his head time after time!
Imagine if Cortez had kept telling Hopkins “you’re holding Bernard, stop holding Bernard!”. Can you imagine it? No, nor can I. Yet watch the Hatton-Mayweather fight and see how often he warns Hatton (again, who is hardly holding at all).
In these two cases, I don’t know if Cortez was biased towards the American fighters, or towards Hopkins and Mayweather because they are such “legends”. Even if it had been a different referee, who let Hatton get in close, I doubt the outcome would have been much different, but I’m pretty sure that Calzaghe would have landed a whole lot more shots on Hopkins if Cortez hadn’t let Hopkins smother all his work by running in for hugs the whole time.
Anyway, again, I would say that while dirty fighting is a problem, it’s precisely the “clever” ones who this writer lets off the hook, along with bad and biased refereeing, that are the biggest problems.Posted February 2, 2014 3:42 pm
Brawling is a part of the sweet science. Actually, I think there’s not enough fighters trying to perfect the art of going toe to toe.Posted February 2, 2014 3:37 pm
Lennox, you sound more like Wlad KlitschkoPosted February 2, 2014 3:34 pm
I was only loved after I retired and the HW division was in disarray. While I was HW champ, I was not loved. Maybe I shouldn’t have held and hit and leaned on my opponents so much, but I had to do that so that I wouldn’t get KOed, don’t you guys see that? It was a part of my defensive strategy.Posted February 2, 2014 3:26 pm
Martin – Sadly I must agree. Im a fan, but I tell folk all the time, a small percentage of his PPV buys are fans who watch Mayweather for his craft. I love to watch him for the subtleties he brings to each fight…the mental dissection of his opponent. A large percentage of his buys are those who dont necessarily want to see his opponent win, but more so want to see the “villian” lose. I dont think it matters the opponent sometimes.Posted February 2, 2014 3:18 pm
lennox used these tactics his whole career. he was literally warned for it by ref cortez in his first title fight with i think it was tucker. to his last horribly dirty fight with vitaly.
again this writer wrote some garbage and nut hugged some turdsPosted February 2, 2014 3:15 pm
Interesting article and perspective. As the athletes who are considered great in a sport progress in said sport, they begin to get away with bending or even the breaking the rules. I cant count the number of times Ive seen Durant or Bryant or James get away with an offensive foul…Verlander, Price or King Felix get away with a balk or strike out of the zone. Its the nature of the game. Boxing is no different. I think the author loses focus of the fact that the term “sweet science” was coined for the sport, but more specifically for certain fighters or elements of a fighters game (how a fighter parries punches or how another fighter throws a particular punch). Look at Tito Trinidad, he wasnt the best defensive fighter in the world and didnt have a vast arsenal of punches like say a Pacman or Mayweather, BUT Tito threw his punches with the best technique we’ve seen in a while. From foot placement to his hips to turning his hand over to his accuracy, when he hit you it hurt because his technique produced power…thats part of the sweet science. Brawlers contain elements of the sweet science. Most brawlers are often the very good body punchers and they can more often than not disrupt fighters who are more technical.Posted February 2, 2014 3:14 pm
Floyd Money Mayweather
When people watch me, they aren’t watching for the sweet science against the toughest competition, they’re watching to get the Floyd Mayweather experience.Posted February 2, 2014 3:12 pm
lennox lewis had NO CHOICE but to turn to these tactics when he face vitaly and was dirty as heck. lennox was notoriously dirty with his hold with the left arm and hit with the right. he knocked out and hurt many a a guy with the tactic so much so that TEAM TUA made a huge fuss about it before the fight saying it better not happen and there better be a ref that does not allow it to happen. then guess what. the fight between to power houses went to decision. BAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAH
I just read the first paragraph this tripe did not warrant any further reading.Posted February 2, 2014 3:12 pm
Well said Martin..Posted February 2, 2014 3:08 pm
“Floyd is the highest paid athlete. It’s not because he’s a good brawler.”
Yes, but it’s not because he’s a skilful practitioner of “the sweet science” either. Rather, it’s because he’s a cartoon villain and people love to hate him. They watch his fights because they’re hoping he gets KTFO. (Admittedly, he has some fans, but I doubt they’re responsible for those high PPV figures: some of his opponents, like De La Hoya, Hatton, Alvarez and Cotto are/were way more popular in the sense of having FANS rather than ANTI-FANS.)Posted February 2, 2014 3:06 pm
Wladamir in the povetkin ‘fight ‘ is a perfect example of what the author is talking about.Posted February 2, 2014 3:05 pm
I think the writer means something different by “brawler” than you do. He seems to mean someone who fights dirty (e.g. uses their head, elbows, forearms…), whereas you’re thinking of punchers/sluggers.Posted February 2, 2014 3:00 pm
Floyd, Ward, and Hopkins are among some of the worst “brawlers” in boxing!!! Floyd uses his elbow and forearm to push off and measure his opponents. Floyd hits on breaks and knocked out Ortiz pretending to hug it out with Ortiz before striking. Floyd held like a mofo against Guerrero, not allowing Ghost to get his offense off on the inside. Ward ain’t no sweet scientist… he’s a dirty fighter. There was a stretch of fights where almost every Ward opponent was cut or hurt from Ward’s headbutts. Not only that, Ward is one of the worst offenders of the hit-and-hold technique. He’ll get on his bicycle, throw one punch, then hold onto his opponents smothering their ability to work on the inside. Hopkins is the master of the hit-and-hold technique. Also as Hopkins has gotten older and moved up in weight, he’s taken to putting his head down and throwing punches. These 3 guys are some of the worst offenders of the “brawling” style. They win cause they fight dirty. That’s why Floyd’s, Ward’s, and Hopkin’s fights are so boring and why they get booed. This “writer” has got things backwards.Posted February 2, 2014 2:57 pm
what a horrible and garbage article. to the reader i would say THIS IS THE FIGHT GAME SON!!!!
Sweet science is just another name for boxing. This is FIGHTING with a limited BOX with which you can hit and deffend and limited weapons to do it “just your gloved fists”.
I believe strauss is terribly confused as to what he is watching and writing about. Its a fight strauss and brawlers are some of the best most identified fighters in the history of the game like george foreman, ron lyle and earnie shavers. angulo is a brawler and gave us an awesome fight he could have won with lara. angulo vs kirkland was two brawlers and one AWESOME fight.
This article is kind of insulting east side itself as though east side does not know what boxing is when stuff like this gets posted. “THIS GUYS” definition of boxing is WAAAAAAAAY OFF. and no the public is not turned off by provodnikov brawling and beating tim bradley down and scrambling his brains. no the public was not turned off by alvarado vs rios, no the public was not turned off by angulo vs kirkland, no the public was not turned off by foreman vs lyle. so please strauss understand that you wrote garbage and epically failed to rationalize your nuthuggery of floyd, ward, and the total turd hopkinsPosted February 2, 2014 2:46 pm
“The truth is some of the best of our current crop of greats, such as Floyd Mayweather, Jr., Bernard Hopkins, and Andre Ward aren’t above cleverly using elbows, forearms, a glove behind the head pulling a man off balance, and the good old noggin.”
Not only are they not “above” it, but I can’t think of three worse offenders in the sport. They certainly seem to be the best at getting away with it, too: they almost never get penalised for that s***.
Something I find just as bad is when taller fighters keep leaning down on the back of the head of smaller fighters. I’m shocked by how much some fighters get away with it. Lennox Lewis used to do it a lot, and never got penalised for it. Tyson Fury did it a lot against Cunningham, and also wasn’t penalised. The very worst example I can think of, however, was Klitschko against Povetkin: that was outrageous! I don’t know if it’s a penalisable offence (the fact that I can’t recall anyone even warned about it suggests to me it’s not), but it definitely should be, and referees should deduct points for it. Wladimir should be ashamed of himself for the way he “fought” against Povetkin. I lost a lot of respect for him after seeing that. Povetkin deserves a rematch, with a referee who’s not going to let Kitschko get away with it.Posted February 2, 2014 2:39 pm
Brazilian Boxing Fan
I enjoy brawling in boxing fights. Check Hagler-Hearns.Posted February 2, 2014 2:35 pm