Pro vs. Amateur, amateur rules.

walshb

Another thread has urged me to conduct this poll.

The best amateurs vs. the best pros over 3 x 3 rds, headgear and comp
scoring. I may be off, but I think no top amatuer has much chance to
last vs. Manny Pacquiao from 140-150 lbs. I also think no top amateur beats
Floyd over 9 minutes.

BTW, I have selected two pros, but I could include more. For this poll, it's these two I have slected.

mrgardener

Complete no-brainer this one.
The pro game is what most amateurs would aspire to.
TBH I couldn't see many seasoned amateurs beating a seasoned pro (except maybe the likes of Felix Savan). Different rules etc but the pro game is definitely tougher.

cowzerp

The poll makes no sense-why not say pro champ v olympic champ rather than pick the 2 that would most likely do great in amateur boxing!!

The poll is made to have answers to suit what you want to hear,,
Mayweather would win Olympic gold now easy, Manny probably not so its inconclusive either way..

I still feel that the olympic champ on the day of his win would beat the majority of pro champs at his weight in an olympic style fight, obviously there is pro boxers that are or where great amateur style boxers that would be the exception.

walshb

cowzerp wrote: »

The poll makes no sense-why not say pro champ v olympic champ rather than pick the 2 that would most likely do great in amateur boxing!!

The poll is made to have answers to suit what you want to hear,,
Mayweather would win Olympic gold now easy, Manny probably not so its inconclusive either way..

I still feel that the olympic champ on the day of his win would beat the majority of pro champs at his weight in an olympic style fight, obviously there is pro boxers that are or where great amateur style boxers that would be the exception.

Paul, I did say that these two were what I picked, but would gladly select a Cotto, Williams, Berto, Gamboa, Pavlik, Dawson. Take your pick. I say any of these over 3 x 3 would be too much for any great amteur, Olympian or world.

So, it's not just Manny or Floyd.

Anyone hear think our silver medalist from 2008 beats Chad Dawson, Kessler, Froch, Abraham, Dirrell, Ward over 9 minutes? And, Kenny would even have a weight advantage too. How about the Chinese lad who got gold? No, I wouldn't be confident of either of them boys lasting 3 x 3 with the names I gave.
Throw in the current LH Amateur world champion (Beterbiyev) and he too doesn't win IMO.

Love amateur boxing and think it's the most skilled sport at Olympic and amteur level, but the top pro
is a different animal altogether. And over 9 minutes I think the top pros will get the job done.
Far harder hitting, and possible body KOs at any time. Too much firepower. The AM
will at some point have to engage.

Paul, as regards say the run of the mill pro, yes, I could see a top amateur beating these
lads over 9 minutes. And, that includes Irish lads like Duddy, Lee, and Macklin (Irish/British).
Sorry, I just don't consider these as top pros. Not elite, or close.

I would not be at all suprised if the best amatuers beat these over 9 minutes..
But, when comparing I think you have to set rules.

In a nutshell: Run of the mill AM vs. Run of the mill pro, PRO wins.
Top AM vs. Top Pro, pro wins; Top AM vs. Run of mill pro, more than likely
top AM wins. All over 9 minutes with headgear and comp scoring.

The most glaring good example that stands out is Vasyl Lomachenko, considered
the best P4P feather in AM boxing. Serioulsy, do you think he beats Gamboa
over 9 minutes? I cannot see it. Nor could I see him beating JML.

Another is our own JJJ who was beaten in Beijing by a single point by
the gold medal winner, Felix Diaz. JJJ should have won only for a warning
that cost him the fight. I cannot see JJJ or Diaz having any chance
against a Cotto, Berto, Khan (particularly Khan, as he has such a good AM pedigree)
Bradley over 9 minutes.

cowzerp

most these lads you name dont knock anyone out in 3 rounds and thats in there own game, at amateur there would be way less punches landed and most Would lose on points to Kenny in an amateur match, in a 3 rd pro match they may win on points as the scoring is different..

For example, Frankie Gavin would beat any pro in an amateur match, will he over 12?!
remains to be seen.

walshb

cowzerp wrote: »

most these lads you name dont knock anyone out in 3 rounds and thats in there own game, at amateur there would be way less punches landed and most Would lose on points to Kenny in an amateur match, in a 3 rd pro match they may win on points as the scoring is different..

For example, Frankie Gavin would beat any pro in an amateur match, will he over 12?!
remains to be seen.

But what happens if those lads, Ward, Froch, Kessler, Dirrell decide to go all out and try to take Kenny out? You don't think they could?
Who says those lads have to be conservative and cute and all that. You say scoring is different? But what does this matter
IF the top pros KO Kenny? That has nothing to do with scoring or computers. That's just plain raw pro
power, and ferocity.

Paul, you have to admit that Egan would be facing firepower that he has never really tasted. Heavy
pro punching. Nothing to do with the more subtle fencing that he is used to. Not saying that
he is being tickled, no way, but getting hit by the best amateurs is not the same as getting hit by
the best pros.

Now, over 4 x 2 mins maybe Kenny would have a better chance, but those 3 minute rds really are tough.

Anyway, good discussing it Paul. As always, interesting!

cowzerp

walshb wrote: »

But what happens if those lads, Ward, Froch, Kessler, Dirrell decide to go all out and try to take Kenny out? You don't think they could?
Who says those lads have to be conservative and cute and all that.

Now, over 4 x 2 mins maybe Kenny would have a better chance, but those 3 minute rds really are tough.

Anyway, good discussing it Paul. As always, interesting!

Genuinely, i dont think they'd land more than a few scoring points in the fight and certainly not stop him over 3-there not trained to land 1 and not recieve 1-Kenny does this for fun..

If they can adapt back to amateur style of boxing then maybe thay can but they may need some practise before hopping straight in with Kenny.

Always like a good owl debate with ya Bren, even when i'm 100% right and its non competitive!!

walshb

Ward is an Olympic champ, now the best at 168 lbs. You don't think he could beat Egan over 3 x 3? Has he somehow magically lost all those years
as a great amateur, and now cannot beat the best amateurs unless it'spast 3 rds??

Froch is a little less likely, but still a very god fighter with great power and the potential to KO Egan with a single scoring shot.
Froch was alos a very accomplished amateur.

Dirrell, a big slick and skilled fighter could easily decipher Egan. No disrespect to Kenny, great amatuer, but Ward and Dirrell were also, and now are also great pros.

btw, who you think between Gamboa and Lomachenko over 9 minutes?

cowzerp

walshb wrote: »

Ward is an Olympic champ, now the best at 168 lbs. You don't think he could beat Egan over 3 x 3? Has he somehow magically lost all those years
as a great amateur, and now cannot beat the best amateurs unless it'spast 3 rds??


Dirrell, a big slick and skilled fighter could easily decipher Egan. No disrespect to Kenny, great amatuer, but Ward and Dirrell were also, and now are also great pros.

btw, who you think between Gamboa and Lomachenko over 9 minutes?

Ward been olympic champ is fair enough but then we're comparing 2 olympic boxers!!

Dirrell is slick and with practise could compete at olympic level in my opinion

I dont know Lomachenko tbh so cant comment!!

walshb

cowzerp wrote: »

Ward been olympic champ is fair enough but then we're comparing 2 olympic boxers!!

Dirrell is slick and with practise could compete at olympic level in my opinion

I dont know Lomachenko tbh so cant comment!!

Paul, Dirrell too was an outstanding amateur who won bronze in Athens at Middle.

Anyway, it all goes back to setting rules. If I can be diplomatic and meet you half way. I would make the best amateur a favorite when meeting the average to good pros, but best vs. best (Pro vs. Amateurs) it is highly unlikely that the AM wins. Hence, it's not just Manny and Floyd, it's a whole
lot more elite pros. Duddy, Macklin, Lee, Kiko, Munroe, Malignaggi and some others probably would not
be good enough to beat the great AMs.

Here is the thing, all the great pros, almost all were also very good/great amateurs. I know the "sports" are different, but
it's subtle. The end of the day, both are boxing, hitting and hurting and stamina, and strength and resolve. These will
exist always, no matter what rules they bring in. I have seen some amazing and tough AM fights.

I recall Frampton and Joyce in our very own National Stadium. Amazing fight, power, speed, strength, fitness,
chin, heart and guts. And there has been many many other great scraps like this one.

makl

Would a Wayne McCullough 1992 as a pro beaten Wayne McCullough the silver medallist at amateur. Why?

Would a Wayne McCullough 1995-99 as a pro beaten Wayne McCullough the silver medallist at amateur. and why?

Years of experience defintely comes into debate with many successful pro boxers being older and more experienced than amateur counterparts. when you say "The best amateurs vs. the best pros over 3 x 3 rds, headgear and comp scoring. " - experience levels in the ring are very often goin to be far different.

Would floyd at 22 have beaten Saitov? Also, Saitov at 30 couldn't compete with/beat Artayev at only 21, - could you see any 21 year old pro boxer upsetting a 21 year old of Floyd's calibre, sorry, many 21 year olds (correction as Tyson comes flashing thru mind). How much is age a factor in each sport?

walshb

makl wrote: »

Would floyd at 22 have beaten Saitov? Also, Saitov at 30 couldn't compete with/beat Artayev at only 21, - could you see any 21 year old pro boxer upsetting a 21 year old of Floyd's calibre, sorry, many 21 year olds (correction as Tyson comes flashing thru mind). How much is age a factor in each sport?

Not with you regarding Saitov. Oleg? This guy was a welter and above, how does he get matched with a 22 year old 130 lb Floyd?
Match him with Mosley, Oscar, Tito..

Now, at 126 and 132 lbs in the 1998-2000 era we had the likes of Kindelan
and Ricardo Juarez.

Now, there is one hell of a match. Floyd at his best at 130 lbs, a brilliant fighter vs. Kindelan, who was max 132 lbs. Fair match. That would be something, and Kindelan has a strong chance.

makl

walshb wrote: »

Not with you regarding Saitov. Oleg? This guy was a welter and above, how does he get matched with a 22 year old 130 lb Floyd?
Match him with Mosley, Oscar, Tito..

Ah fek of course. Thought i had it all factored up and floyd as a 22 year old 147! anyway...

walshb wrote: »

Now, at 126 and 132 lbs in the 1998-2000 era we had the likes of Kindelan
and Ricardo Juarez.

Now, there is one hell of a match. Floyd at his best at 130 lbs, a brilliant fighter vs. Kindelan, who was max 132 lbs. Fair match. That would be something, and Kindelan has a strong chance.

Would be a class fight alright.

walshb

I tell you, there is one AM fighter who both Saitov and Carruth know well, that never won gold. Juan Hernandez. His combination of size, skill, power and all around ability would be a great match over 9 mins with headger vs. any welters today and from recent years.