Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Poll: Your Best Technical (Pure) Boxer Ever

Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #21
    I voted Pep from the list. I would have included Whitaker, Duran, Barrera, Napoles, and Robinson on your list as well.
    billeau2 billeau2 likes this.

    Comment


      #22
      Originally posted by GhostofDempsey View Post
      I voted Pep from the list. I would have included Whitaker, Duran, Barrera, Napoles, and Robinson on your list as well.
      Sweet Pea is a good shout,imo.
      Anomalocaris Anomalocaris likes this.

      Comment


        #23
        Hearns was a beautiful boxer when he was not trying to decapitate his opponent.
        Bronson66 Bronson66 likes this.

        Comment


          #24
          Originally posted by Bronson66 View Post

          Sweet Pea is a good shout,imo.
          - - Pea #1 clown show no doubt that cost him some critical losses.

          Comment


            #25
            Originally posted by Mr Mitts View Post
            Maybe your guy is not even on my list of candidates, but there is a good chance. If he is not, please reveal him. The candidates are in no meaningful order, as in randomized. Maybe you think the list needs some changes. All right by me, but I doubt if they allow that when you can't even edit a title you screwed up on.

            Pure, technical? You probably get the picture but it can be discussed further. To me there is a lot of deep schooling involved, and usually a lot of defensive genius. Some guys are so good at defense they are fun to watch. Not many, for me at least.
            Gosh... Its kind of tough without some definition of primacy beyond "technical boxer." Someone who threw all the shots? like Tunney? A technical punching marvel with no wasted movements? (Louis), a defensive specialist? (Whitaker).

            The default answer here for me is Ray Robinson. He did the most things flawlessly.

            Comment


              #26
              Originally posted by Marchegiano View Post

              Just trying to figure out what makes Jim unknowable bro.


              Corbett is not any more or less misrepresented by historians than any other figure from the same era is he?


              Really all I'm after. If there's something Corbett specific that makes Corbett a little harder to know I'd like to know about that.
              He gets "glossed" a lot... But then again he was not necessarily a special fighter given his body of work. That is, until we dig a bit and learn that while he himself was not necessarily ATG level, he was instrumental in defining one set of skills claimed by Tunney. it is alas, a martial arts handicap that makes me look at the teacher, when looking at any fighter... Tunney came up learning the ropes post classical when the likes of Gans and Dempsey focused the sport on the punches. But Tunney also retained a body of bare knuckle, pre classical knowledge which was buttressed by Corbett mentoring him.

              Comment


                #27
                Originally posted by djtmal View Post
                Pernell "Sweet Pea" Whitaker
                Yep.....

                Comment


                  #28
                  Originally posted by GhostofDempsey View Post
                  I voted Pep from the list. I would have included Whitaker, Duran, Barrera, Napoles, and Robinson on your list as well.
                  Man, you can consider anyone you want for the list. I already said that to Hammy. Just write in a post who you think is the best pure boxer ever. Just make sure you indicate clearly that that is your vote on the matter. It is not clear to me that you are actually voting for someone else.

                  Comment


                    #29
                    Originally posted by billeau2 View Post

                    Gosh... Its kind of tough without some definition of primacy beyond "technical boxer." Someone who threw all the shots? like Tunney? A technical punching marvel with no wasted movements? (Louis), a defensive specialist? (Whitaker).

                    The default answer here for me is Ray Robinson. He did the most things flawlessly.
                    In the introductory post I mentioned deep schooling. In those 40-50 words I also mentioned defense twice including defensive genius. I told you that is what it means to me. Combining that with the list of candidates gives a pretty clear picture of what I think. The two Leonards are the only guys on there with anything like a big punch.

                    But I can't tell you what a pure boxer is to you. But one should be able to ascertain that defense has to play a hugely important role. The 'not getting hit' part of the art.

                    To me Robinson may have done more things right than anyone as well. But one of the things he didn't do in the film he is captured in is to avoid getting hit a lot. He got hit a lot, at least as a middleweight. He wanted to fight too much. He wanted to end fights. He got in there a lot and got hit a lot. Sure, he knew how to slip, roll, parry, take steam off, dance...but Robinson still got hit a lot in my view. He even wanted to fight a little too much against Maxim, which I always thought lost him that fight. I do not consider Robinson a great ring general. His greatest application of defense may have been his deadly offense.

                    Best ever P4P? Maybe so. I have him top 5 at the least. But probably not in the top 30 for defense. He liked money, butts in the seats. Robinson slugged as much or more than he boxed. Sluggers get hit. He wanted to end fights as early as possible. He loved the celebrations, as everyone knows.

                    Comment


                      #30
                      Originally posted by Mr Mitts View Post

                      In the introductory post I mentioned deep schooling. In those 40-50 words I also mentioned defense twice including defensive genius. I told you that is what it means to me. Combining that with the list of candidates gives a pretty clear picture of what I think. The two Leonards are the only guys on there with anything like a big punch.

                      But I can't tell you what a pure boxer is to you. But one should be able to ascertain that defense has to play a hugely important role. The 'not getting hit' part of the art.

                      To me Robinson may have done more things right than anyone as well. But one of the things he didn't do in the film he is captured in is to avoid getting hit a lot. He got hit a lot, at least as a middleweight. He wanted to fight too much. He wanted to end fights. He got in there a lot and got hit a lot. Sure, he knew how to slip, roll, parry, take steam off, dance...but Robinson still got hit a lot in my view. He even wanted to fight a little too much against Maxim, which I always thought lost him that fight. I do not consider Robinson a great ring general. His greatest application of defense may have been his deadly offense.

                      Best ever P4P? Maybe so. I have him top 5 at the least. But probably not in the top 30 for defense. He liked money, butts in the seats. Robinson slugged as much or more than he boxed. Sluggers get hit. He wanted to end fights as early as possible. He loved the celebrations, as everyone knows.
                      "I could slip more punches and be more defensive ,but it bores me." Robinson.
                      Mr Mitts Mr Mitts likes this.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X
                      TOP