Talking about it in another thread lets get it started, my view of a complete fighter is a guy that has the following:
Heart
Power
Speed
Footwork
Desire
Chin
I`ll name my top three, Ray Robinson, Marvin Habler 78-83, Muhammad Ali 64-67.
Printable View
Talking about it in another thread lets get it started, my view of a complete fighter is a guy that has the following:
Heart
Power
Speed
Footwork
Desire
Chin
I`ll name my top three, Ray Robinson, Marvin Habler 78-83, Muhammad Ali 64-67.
I totally agree with Hagler in the early 80's he was pretty slick counter puncher, and is often forgotten how good his skills actually were.Quote:
Originally Posted by Markusdarkus
Johnny Nelson earns all the ticks.
He showed desire coming back from a terrible start to his career. And a terrible middle period - recovering from the De Leon debacle. And showed tremendous heart to get off the floor to KO Sellers and beat Cantatore in Italy.
He's shown plenty of speed, footwork and power - stopping warriors like Andries and Thompson.
And his chin - the record speaks for itself. Fact.
Floyd Mayweather jr
Sugar Ray Leonard
Evander Holyfield
Winky Wright
BHop
Gerald McClellan
You piss taking so and so ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Fenster
JMM is a pretty well rounded fighter.
Question for you JT do you consider Holyfield a complete fighter at Heavyweight as well ?? and as for McClellan i think he ticks most boxes except for his defense which was the weakest part of his boxing IMO. But he did have a granite chin those over hand rights he took from Jackson would of KO'ed some Heavyweights.Quote:
Originally Posted by JT Rock
I'll go with Floyd Mayweather Jr. Can't really remember him having a flaw.
Probably the only one is that he sometimes lay's on the ropes a bit too much.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chino
Absolutely.. Holyfield at Heavy gets all the ticks from me, he didnt have blazing fast hands but you can ring him up in everyother categoryQuote:
Originally Posted by ICBQuestion for you JT do you consider Holyfield a complete fighter at Heavyweight as well ?? and as for McClellan i think he ticks most boxes except for his defense which was the weakest part of his boxing IMO. But he did have a granite chin those over hand rights he took from Jackson would of KO'ed some Heavyweights.Quote:
Originally Posted by JT Rock
Gman chose not to use his defense half the time unfortunately... He was a very underrated Boxer but to me he meets all those categories
to me its a flaw only if it proves detrimental, it hasnt caused him problems at all his defense is tip top thereQuote:
Originally Posted by ICBProbably the only one is that he sometimes lay's on the ropes a bit too much.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chino
I think the only thing he lacked was true Heavyweight punching power, but saying that wasn't he the first man to drop iron chinned Ray Mercer and turn that fight around ?? he also knocked down Riddick Bowe with one punch, and put iron chinned Mike Tyson down with 1 punch as well. So actually my first comment could be completely wrong. The thing i loved about Holyfield was his counter punching when he used his boxing skills instead of brawling, he was masterful to watch, as for Gman i've seen a lot of his fights and i do agree he had underrated boxing skills, but i still think his defense could have been better but other than like i said he ticks most of the boxes.Quote:
Originally Posted by JT RockAbsolutely.. Holyfield at Heavy gets all the ticks from me, he didnt have blazing fast hands but you can ring him up in everyother categoryQuote:
Originally Posted by ICBQuestion for you JT do you consider Holyfield a complete fighter at Heavyweight as well ?? and as for McClellan i think he ticks most boxes except for his defense which was the weakest part of his boxing IMO. But he did have a granite chin those over hand rights he took from Jackson would of KO'ed some Heavyweights.Quote:
Originally Posted by JT Rock
Gman chose not to use his defense half the time unfortunately... He was a very underrated Boxer but to me he meets all those categories
I also have to add Oscar Delahoya to that list.. He is as well rounded as they come too
;DQuote:
Originally Posted by ICBYou piss taking so and so ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Fenster
Not really. Almost all great/semi-great/quality fighters share those attributes.
The perfect fighter doesn't exist.
Roy Jones wouldn't be Roy Jones if he wasn't different ;)
Everybody lacks something I suppose, but I like SRR, Duran & Pepp for this thread
I thought you would of mentioned your boy Tyson BIG H, but Ricardo Lopez is probably top 5 the most skillful and the most complete package i've ever seen.Quote:
Originally Posted by BIG H
Ray Robinson had the lot. Ali - you could argue struggled to fight on the inside.
Ray Leonard was almost on the list but I decided to keep him off the list because he was a little to poor at giving rematches - I marked him down under desire for that.
Nah, Tyson was a wrecking machine, he did have a lot of tools, but also lacked a lot. He still beats Lewis Prime for Prime though ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by ICBI thought you would of mentioned your boy Tyson BIG H, but Ricardo Lopez is probably top 5 the most skillful and the most complete package i've ever seen.Quote:
Originally Posted by BIG H
Game on ;D
You're right about Finito Ice
Hhhmmmm could be but I see it more as his strategy. You have guys just throwing punches and getting tired while he just slips away from them and walks out of the ropes without a drop of sweat. Always comes out clean from his fights.Quote:
Originally Posted by ICBProbably the only one is that he sometimes lay's on the ropes a bit too much.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chino
It didn't work against Castillo though thats why in the rematch he stayed off the ropes at all times, just circling the ring.Quote:
Originally Posted by ChinoHhhmmmm could be but I see it more as his strategy. You have guys just throwing punches and getting tired while he just slips away from them and walks out of the ropes without a drop of sweat. Always comes out clean from his fights.Quote:
Originally Posted by ICBProbably the only one is that he sometimes lay's on the ropes a bit too much.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chino
I've often said 2 of the most complete fighters that my eyes have ever seen are:
Alexis Arguello
Ricardo Lopez
I would also include:
SRR
PBF
Duran
Ive often wondered about Tyson. Its funny that Cus always worked on the mind with his Fighters and yet, all his Fighters were emotionaly weak. including Torres and Patterson strange.
I wouldn't list Mike Tyson on here.
When I think of complete fighters, I think of guys who can fight at all ranges, who can box on the move or be aggressive, and use different styles if necessary. Tyson had a nice heavy jab for his size, but it wasn't like he was going to win a fight on the inside. He had to do his damage at mid-range or when he was coming inside. He was also prone to laziness on the inside.
Marvin Hagler is someone I think of when describing a "complete" fighter. He boxed well and used the ring well. He could apply pressure very well. He could fight on the inside. He had solid defense with his parrying. He wasn't blazing fast, but had pretty respectable speed, and heavy hands as well. He could take shots well.
Floyd Mayweather's not the biggest puncher, but he has respectable power. He's fast, smart, can box on the move, fight on the inside, apply pressure when he needs to, attack the body, defend, etc...I'd consider him a pretty complete fighter.
Roberto Duran, Ray Leonard, Bernard Hopkins....all in their primes I'd call them complete fighters.
Now you said going by "ALL" the attributes, I would say a Prime Tyson , Ike Ibeabuchi , Arron Pryor and Manny Pacquioa
Hagler wasnt good with movers,I remember He struggled with Kevin Finnigan twice it was Finnigan getting cut late that saved him. The first time good Judges had Kevin in front hence the second Fight.
Yea i've heard about those fights but did Hagler win the 2nd fight in more impressive fashion Scrap ?? because Hagler always seemed to do better in rematches.Quote:
Originally Posted by Scrap
Vernon Forrest in his peak was one hell of a Fighter... Just fought the wrong fight against Mayorga
Not really, just that Kevin got cut earlier. I loved Marvin as a fighter and a man Lovely guy, but believe He would have struggled with the likes of Monzon, Styles.
Well he once told Tyson to watch out for people, and that he was not sophisticated enough to deal with them.Quote:
Originally Posted by Scrap
That being said, I doubt that helped him out any
I heard Kevin was a good fighter and so was his brother Chris he fought a hell of a fight against Bob Foster, as for Monzon vs Hagler not sure how that one would of gone, i do feel Hagler was the faster puncher, because Monzon was always slow hand speed wise IMO. But Monzon was an extremely accurate puncher and could bully opponent's very well. Its hard one to choose from IMO, but one thing is for certain is that none of them would be getting stopped because they both had iron chins. I know you may disagree with this Scrap but i always felt Michael Nunn would of been a bad style match up for Hagler as well.Quote:
Originally Posted by Scrap
Nunn being a southpaw was his advantage, he looses that with Marvin I think Marvin does a job on him. If he had been as good rougthing it as he was expensive with his Telephone bills He would have been unbeatable ;D.
Good story ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Scrap
But seriously Scrap i think Nunn could have been great but he ruined himself, that shot he KO'ed Kalambay with was one of the hardest shots i've ever seen. The sound of it was scary and lets remember Kalambay had never been KO'ed in 60+ fights so it must of been some shot. I think that shot could have come close to even KO'ing Marvin Hagler himself.
And Frozen i can see your viewing this thread you went to that Nunn vs Kalambay fight didn't you ?? could you hear that shot from where you was ??
He didnt make a habit off it did He ;D.
Yes your right surprisingly he wasn't known as a puncher, thats what makes that punch even more scary IMO Scrap.Quote:
Originally Posted by Scrap
Believe it or not Scrap this thread started when MarkusDarkus and I were debating whether or not SRR was the greatest or not;)
I said I saw flaws in Robinson.
I found him a forward-Back fghter, as he threw very few punches while turning or moving horizontally.
I feel Welterweight, he was allowed to look devastating because of his power and undeniable speed, but at Middleweight this power was not as relevant and his skills didn't carry him through often.
His wins at Middleweight were fights he could win with physicality, so he never truely out skilled anyone that he couldn't dominate physically
Bernard Hopkins
Ray Robinson
Erik Morales
I was waiting for this one from you cutmemick as i was reading through the thread. Hard to argue against.Quote:
Originally Posted by CutMeMick
I think based on the criteria given in this thread there are literally hundreds. What makes fighters special though are intangibles, ability that can hardly be put into the proper wording.
Donny thats a very good analogy of it all as regards SRR