What factors do you consider when determining a fighter’s greatness?

[medic5678]

Whether he had enough sense to quit when the time came.

[billeau2]

I want to extrapolate on my reply.

Think about legacies . . . What if Fury doesn't get up; one punch and how much does Wilder's legacy change?

What if Marciano had won the first Walcott fight by TKO instead of a legendary right hand; what if Wslcott is stopped on his feet and not d****d over the bottom rope, would the absence of that one punch change the legacy of his power?

So many of these seminal events would in fact radically change a fighter's standing. Look at a sort of reverse of the situation: What if the Judges had given Jimmy Young victories over Norton and Ali? He certainly should have won those fights to most people... Suddenly you have a guy who in his prime only lost on the tail ends and beat virtually all of the dangerous fighters in what is often considered the most competitive era for the division...

[Noelanthony]

I want to extrapolate on my reply.

Think about legacies . . . What if Fury doesn't get up; one punch and how much does Wilder's legacy change?

What if Marciano had won the first Walcott fight by TKO instead of a legendary right hand; what if Wslcott is stopped on his feet and not d****d over the bottom rope, would the absence of that one punch change the legacy of his power?

I'm just playing i have since read a few of your post and you are very well researched. However, for me power is not a skill. fighters are blessed with it or they are not. Power can only get you so far, skills pays the bills.

I agree with you in regards to WILDER but we all had our doubts about him , some more than others.

We can peruse throughout all the weight divisions today and possibly with a few exceptions all the champions that head their divisions are not necessarily the biggest punchers in their weight class

[billeau2]

I'm just playing i have since read a few of your post and you are very well researched. However, for me power is not a skill. fighters are blessed with it or they are not. Power can only get you so far, skills pays the bills.

I agree with you in regards to WILDER but we all had our doubts about him , some more than others.

We can peruse throughout all the weight divisions today and possibly with a few exceptions all the champions that head their divisions are not necessarily the biggest punchers in their weight class

There is a certain argument regarding development and pedagogy... It states that when someone has a talent that gives them tremendous advantage in the beginning of a pursuit, it can ultimately hinder them as they rely upon this talent instead of building other skills. Also, they may lose interest when suddenly they are not such high achievers in an endeavor, as the field narrows.

A Puncher in boxing could easily fall under this trap. Some people claim Tyson did, I tend to disagree because Tyson was very well studied and you can see how he applies concepts that Dempsey utilized. But other big punchers... it happens all the time. My favorite example is Juan Ma. I think to this day he was very talented, but when he couldn't get by with his power, he lost his moxy, ultimately being beat by Salido, an excellent fighter, but not great fighter.

I also saw it in martial arts... I am a prime example actually... I started studying Karate and while I was a street wise kid, I was a fighter out of necessity and had no particular talent for fighting. As the one White guy in the club, in a fighting club, I was the runt of the litter so to speak. I saw so many talented guys who could do so much compared to me, just Peter out over time. I stuck it out, struggling all the while with no real special talents. But eventually through it I developed incredible legs... I could kick really in devastating fashion, and... I went on to develop skills in Ju Jutsu, etc and as a teacher. So I have experienced this principle first hand.

[The Old LefHook]

One of the main things to consider is the propensity of halfwits to jump on their bandwagon.

Take Tyson, for instance. Halfwits the world over swore he was the most devastating fighting machine they had ever witnessed. Cooler heads have determined he was probably not even an AT top 10 heavyweight, though he did look better than anyone else against 2nd tier opponents.

[QueensburyRules]

One of the main things to consider is the propensity of halfwits to jump on their bandwagon.

Take Tyson, for instance. Halfwits the world over swore he was the most devastating fighting machine they had ever witnessed. Cooler heads have determined he was probably not even an AT top 10 heavyweight, though he did look better than anyone else against 2nd tier opponents.

- -Nanowits been jumping on Iron Mike ever since he lost the HOF mainstays in his development, Cus and Jacobs.


Always been fashionable for the toothless to gum a fighter when he's down even if he was record setter in his day.

[DeeMoney]

I want to extrapolate on my reply.

Think about legacies . . . What if Fury doesn't get up; one punch and how much does Wilder's legacy change?

What if Marciano had won the first Walcott fight by TKO instead of a legendary right hand; what if Wslcott is stopped on his feet and not d****d over the bottom rope, would the absence of that one punch change the legacy of his power?

I got another one of recent vintage, and it doesnt even require an alteration of anything within the ring. What if Adalaide Byrd werent a judge for GGG Canelo 1? That wouldn't even require the fight to have gone any differently (as most saw it as a G victory).

Canelo can still have won the rematch, but would he be thought of as being as great as many think of him now (which he is, but perceptions change)? Would GGG get more respect among the general public?

[QueensburyRules]

I got another one of recent vintage, and it doesnt even require an alteration of anything within the ring. What if Adalaide Byrd werent a judge for GGG Canelo 1? That wouldn't even require the fight to have gone any differently (as most saw it as a G victory).

Canelo can still have won the rematch, but would he be thought of as being as great as many think of him now (which he is, but perceptions change)? Would GGG get more respect among the general public?

- -Begs the question of what if boxing was not only honest, but intelligent in the way it conducts it's business where folks interested in the sport could actually see and understand the scoring in real time?

The Byrds, the Cortez and Baylisses and Nevada commish ect would all all be out of business.

I scored Canelo/GGG I as one point win for Canelo, but I always score even rounds, a lot in this bout, so the result as a Draw puts me in range of the actual event to understand folks are actually arguing over who won the even rounds, ie scoreless periods in ball sports that the people can see and understand in real time?

The 2nd fight was all Canelo as GGG remembered in the first fight all the times Canelo was walking him into punches and had no answer for when the kid took ring center and knocked him backwards for the duration.

But Canelo haters gonna hate no matter because boxing as currently constructed is nontransparent and deliberately opaque because all the big $$$ being earned is by the gaming houses. Boxing insiders with information not available to the public are cleaning up.