Printable View
Mayweather-Never throws in combinations.
Not an 8 piece combo, not even six consecutive punches thrown in 19 years.
RJJ- won with reflex agility and talent. He has no fundamentals. Not offensively, damn sure not defensively. His last 10 or so fights! Saying back to Glenn Johnson : horrible defense.
A lot more fighters, but those 2 for starters.
Serious Not one fighter in all of boxindom is 100% across the board.
The Floyd thing I really don't see as a flaw. Floyd chooses his punches better than any boxer in history (in terms of landing them accurately and not getting countered in return). His philosophy was never to throw volume and hope to land something, it was always to hit a guy at the most opportune time, land the initial shot, and look to either dodge or counter the retaliation shot. Sure, if he was throwing 6-8 punch combinations, he probably would have been more exciting and stopped a few more guys, but then you also run the risk of catching something in return ala Khan/Garcia. So when a guy goes almost 20 years undefeated doing something, it's hard for me to accept it as a flaw.Quote:
Originally Posted by SlimTrae
The thing about Roy having no fundamentals I never understood. I mean we're talking about an amateur superstar who dominated in the olympics to win a gold medal (although he received a silver). Yeah he was fast as fuck and did a lot of unorthodox shit and got away with stuff a slower man couldn't have, but it doesn't mean he didn't have the fundamentals there. There was never a guy more fluid in the ring than Roy Jones. Every punch was crisp (except for some of the more unorthodox shit he did), he could throw a punch from any angle, his footwork was impeccable and he was never off balance, he could double and triple up on a jab faster than most guys could throw a single one... he was a technical marvel. If people want to pick on a guy for having shoddy fundamentals (or at least getting away from them), look at how vulnerable Prince Naseem looked against competent boxers as he constantly threw himself off balance. Roy Jones was never off balance. He was a technical marvel.
I was saying that about Floyd in the Pac fight. He just has never been a combination punched which is why he struggles the most with pressure fighters. His one punch at a time makes it hard to keep them off of him.
He's had 2 close fights in 19 years.Quote:
Originally Posted by powerpuncher
Every Rose Has Its Thorns...
and both were pressure fightersQuote:
Originally Posted by BeanflickerHe's had 2 close fights in 19 years.Quote:
Originally Posted by powerpuncher
I think slim is correct. Floyd is great no doubt. Could his often lack of excitement be a flaw. He's fought some boring looking fights. That is mostly due to his phenomenal defense which I personally find exciting but I know many don't. Is Floyd's not closing the show ie running in the twelve a flaw or just smart ringsmanship. Not saying it's so, just posing the question.
Foreman is my favorite boxer. I wasn't around to see him in his prime but I watch all of his fights and enjoyed his comeback. He always said his greatest flaw was his lack of a jab during his prime years. I can't point out every boxers flaw but what athlete in any sport has ever achieved perfection in both offense, defense and over all performance.
Just like every cowboy has the same sad song.Quote:
Originally Posted by NVSemin
Every stunning super model also makes a mess in the bowl after midnight :-X
I may be off topic
Speaking of flaws, JCC Jr. Vs. Fonfara is being replayed this eve on Showtime. There is a walking flaw in the ring.
This is why SRR is called P4P and he was way ahead of anyone, because he was almost 100% perfect.Quote:
Originally Posted by SlimTrae
You gotta love Goosen and his bitter with referee shows. Fighter loyal! The ref could be handing him money and he'd fine a dispute ;DQuote:
Originally Posted by walrus
Man. This was such a serious breakdown and talent gap on replay. Putting money on never seeing Chavez less than 170 again
That damn Floyd, it's hard to argue with success, if he'd just lose we could say some really bad shit about him.Quote:
Originally Posted by SlimTrae
Floyd's flaw is that he is boring because he makes it look too easy, and by the way he doesn't throw enough combinations. Lol
GGG is exciting with all the KOs but again he's a fighter that makes it look too easy so many fans doubt him, and by the way he gets hit more than he should. Lol
Nope, his defense was mediocre.Quote:
Originally Posted by NVSeminThis is why SRR is called P4P and he was way ahead of anyone, because he was almost 100% perfect.Quote:
Originally Posted by SlimTrae
I don't know about others but my doubts of GGG are not about his ability but rather his opposition. He's 33, Floyds resume was better at 24. There's something wrong with that. But they keep making fights, like being busy is enough. It isn't. Eventually you have to slow down and try and make a meaningful fight.Quote:
Originally Posted by beenKOedThat damn Floyd, it's hard to argue with success, if he'd just lose we could say some really bad shit about him.Quote:
Originally Posted by SlimTrae
Floyd's flaw is that he is boring because he makes it look too easy, and by the way he doesn't throw enough combinations. Lol
GGG is exciting with all the KOs but again he's a fighter that makes it look too easy so many fans doubt him, and by the way he gets hit more than he should. Lol
And they need to stop with the lies. If he is willing to move up for this guy and that guy and another he should be willing to move up for the better fighters as well. After he proves himself he can hide out in a shitty division of he wants. But first, this is sport, be sporting.
Some of the great boxers were so good at some things that people thought they were bad at others. In many cases, they weren't bad at those things ..... just slightly less good.
Incidentally, I can't think what Sugar Ray Robinsons 'flaw' was. Nor Henry Armstrong?
Yeah and he dominated the rematches so what's your point?Quote:
Originally Posted by powerpuncherand both were pressure fightersQuote:
Originally Posted by BeanflickerHe's had 2 close fights in 19 years.Quote:
Originally Posted by powerpuncher
He had defensive flaws: people forget that he wasn't the hardest guy to hit in the world and often had to rely on his solid chin and toughness. If you're talking about defensive capabilities, he's not even in the same league as guys like Floyd or Pernell.Quote:
Originally Posted by X
That he has flawsQuote:
Originally Posted by BeanflickerYeah and he dominated the rematches so what's your point?Quote:
Originally Posted by powerpuncherand both were pressure fightersQuote:
Originally Posted by BeanflickerHe's had 2 close fights in 19 years.Quote:
Originally Posted by powerpuncher
Could it also be labeled as >Quote:
Originally Posted by SlimTrae
> a lesser strength
> not his best attribute
....so you didn't list Ali's flaws???Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill PaxtomCould it also be labeled as >Quote:
Originally Posted by SlimTrae
> a lesser strength
> not his best attribute
El Kabong
Cassius Clay had many flaws.
And Muhammad Ali, had way too many flaws to put down on this 'site'.
First > Cassius Clay looked very good, in a poor Heavyweight Division.
Second > Muhammad Ali was also very good, but he was 'not' Great.
__________________________________________________ _______________________
"Now if you're looking for a 'great box-er'. Come in the barn and take a look for yourself" ......... Pussy Galore
https://sp.yimg.com/ib/th?id=JN.Yd%2...g&pid=15.1&P=0
Yet these so called flaws have never caused him to lose a fight... :roll eyes: even after, you know, nearly 20 years.Quote:
Originally Posted by powerpuncher
Every fighter should aspire to have that flaw. ;D
Flaw does not have to mean weakness just that they do not do it as well as what they are really good at. Tito had a bomb of a left hook but his right hand was average in comparison.
And every night has its dawn.Quote:
Originally Posted by walrusJust like every cowboy has the same sad song.Quote:
Originally Posted by NVSemin
Good responses, but not on the mark.
Best example PBF vs Corley. We all know Floyd turned that into a fight. Yet his punches may have came often-but they weren't combos.
PBF vs Gatti. That fight he does throw combos, but they IMO resemble Tarver's combos: kinda robotic.
My argument isn't that Floyd chooses not to throw in combinations: he can't.
He is fast from point A to point B-Not like RJJ, Ray Leonard, they throw fast mad combos.
I totally agree with Manny Stewards assessment of Shane Mosley: his jab is more of a range finder.
Solid, sound and has the fundamentals down.
Hook? Nasty!
But his jab was almost passive. I'd call that a major flaw for such a fine boxer puncher.
My RJJ rebuttal:
His peers, Toney, Hopkins they used techniques called old school or fundamentals when defending.
JT & Hop don't fight the same, yet they both know how to evade shots by shoulder roll.
They both turn shots over when countering, Tarver also.
THEY BOTH turn their bodies in a way that leaves such a small window.
So when I allege Roy lacks fundamentals: specifically I mean his defense.
He simply does the rope-a-dope.
Covers up on the ropes or in a corner.
He doesn't take a subtle step, twist or pivot like Hop or Julio Cesar Chavez.
That's why everyone started kicking his ass. Not just because he has little punch resistance, but also he lacked the knowledge of a solid defence to replace what his youth did: reflexive mastery & impeccable timing.
Clearly gifts and talent, not the product of fundamentals.
And that's my argument as a fan, not a fighter!;D
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlimTrae
Let me tell you about combos.
... and in this case I guess I'll be defending Floyd.
Combos are sometimes overrated. I'd rather see a fighter pick his spots for some well-placed, hard, meaningful shots... than a flurry of useless pitti-pat punches that are nothing but eye candy for the judges. Couple of cases in point: Calzaghe and DLH. I saw several fights where both put together the proverbial combo (the kind a Jim Lampley has orgasms over) and they didn't mean a damn thing. Yes... there are good combinations. But not every combination is a good one. And just because a fighter doesn't throw 20-punch combos doesn't make him any worse than one who does. You rewatch some of those things in slow motion and they don't accomplish a damn thing.
Agreed with Tito and I think it's a bit naive to assume that just because a guy doesn't do something, that he CAN'T do something, especially when you are talking about virtuosos like Roy and Floyd who could do anything they wanted in the ring and made it look easy due to their physical gifts and ring IQ.
I mean really, as fast as Floyd is (especially in his prime at 130-140)... am I supposed to believe he couldn't put together a combination if he wanted to? That he was in the gym trying to throw 6 punches on the bag and just wasn't coordinated or agile enough to do it? Or is it more plausible that combinations just don't factor in to his defensive, "safety first" style?
Do I think that Roy, an olympic gold medalist (we all know he was), a guy who went 15 years undefeated (besides the avenged DQ loss) and won world titles from middleweight to heavyweight... that he never learned boxing fundamentals? It doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me. Roy's defence wasn't all about being fast: he had to have the fundamentals of movement and range to fight his style. And he wasn't a rope-a-doper: he was AMAZING at catching and rolling shots on the ropes and countering with his own brutal shots. Watch Roy Jones vs Brannon, that's not rope-a-dope, that's brilliant in-fighting coming from sound fundamentals and many years of learning in the gym. You can't accomplish what Roy did in his career without fundamentals. Yeah Jones sucked once he was in his mid 30s, but so did Leonard, Whitaker, Robinson, and just about every other quick slickster I can think of outside of Floyd and Bhop.
I'll counter.
The example of RJJ vs Brannon occurred when?
Youth, prime?
That was and is my argument. That fight Roy was in his youth years
Fundamentals don't get lost as one grows older, speed does reflexes do.
So where was that for eight plus rounds against Glencoffe? Tarver?
And that example u listed is about it.
Roy vs Toney P4P fight, you would argue that was NOT Roy displaying talent, youth? , Rather fundamentals? What round?
What actions? DEFENSIVELY or offensively, please elaborate.
And for the statement of assumption, for me it is a proclamation. I even gave examples of fights where he did throw punches -plural. Saying Floyd could have thrown combos but chose not to ...
Is as far to the outer limits of claim Cassius Clay (could) have been a body puncher BUT..
He chose not too.
End game for me: Floyd did put shots together vs Corley, Gatti Augustus & -probably a few rookie fights. He doesn't throw them today because he doesn't throw them well.
Its on you gents: Good dialogue both ways!
Muhammad was another one that was prone to the useless combos. As blasphemic as that may sound, it's true. Pitty-pat punches designed to do......... NOTHING, really. I love combinations as much as the next guy. The powerful double hook... one to the body, another to the head... and scores of other combos that put guys on their butts. But I'd rather watch a guy methodically pick his spots, looking for where the punch will best go through and be most effective.... than the useless "round-grabbing" flurry of nothing punches. That's actually one of my biggest pet peeves in the sport.
I agree, it's those RJJ power combos I like.Quote:
Originally Posted by TitoFan
Especially when Haglar had Ray on the ropes round 10 & Ray combos his way off the ropes. Haglar had no response.
Or the many combos Ray landed to take the title from Benitez. Really a war of attrition to which Ray's power proved underrated.
Can't say I've ever seen RJJ throw useless pitty-pat combos.
That I would attribute to someone like Paulie Malinaggi.
Andre Dirrell also throws combos that have impact.
Again, Floyd has thrown combos in a few early fights, but he can't throw them like RJJ, Sugar Ray, Meldrick Taylor, fighters who throw (meaningful) combinations.
I think where we differ is that you seem to be looking at athletic ability and technique like they're mutually exclusive: either one relies on technique/fundamentals, or he relies on athletic ability. Athletic ability, speed, reflexes, ect is what powers the technique. You can't succeed in boxing with just one or the other. You used the example of James Toney as a great fundamentalist, but to pull off that slick counter-punching, shoulder rolling defence, he needed the speed and reflexes to do it, as he was a great athlete when he was in shape. If you look at James in his prime and then when he hit his mid to late 30s... he was getting hit with shots he never would haven taken in his prime.Quote:
Originally Posted by SlimTrae
All that shit that Roy did - catching punches, slipping punches, ducking punches, rolling punches... that's not stuff he made up on the spot. That's hundreds of hours in the gym from childhood to adulthood to be able to do that stuff. Guys like Mike McCallum have listed Jones as the smartest fighter he's ever fought.
And to say Floyd can't throw combinations well? As good as Floyd is, as technically brilliant as he is, as long as he's been training... you really believe he couldn't figure out how to throw a combination well?
For sure... the "shoe shining". I was never a fan of it.Quote:
Originally Posted by TitoFan
I love a good 2 punch combo but when you commit to throwing more than that, you're running the risk of being countered. Like what happened to Khan, he committed to a multi-punch combo against Garcia and Danny came right over the top as he was throwing his third punch and put him on his ass, in a fight that Khan looked to be well on his way to winning.
A guy like Floyd has forgotten more about boxing than any of us will probably ever know, so I assume if he doesn't throw them there's a good reason for it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jg8eZ3xlX3g
A Twist,
'Every Great Boxer Has A Flaw'
or
'The Boxer Who Was A Great Fighting Machine'
This is the kind of boxing debate I truly enjoy. Much respect to you both, Slim and Bean.... that's what makes the forum fun. I especially enjoy this type of debate because it has to do with boxing technique and styles. What makes a boxer great... or not so great. I'd have to admit you don't see Floyd throwing a lot of combinations, at least in this day and age. But to agree with Bean, it's not because he can't or doesn't know how. I just think he's found that he can be just as effective in winning fights by using his punches the way he does. Is he defensive-minded? Absolutely. A great boxer should be. Floyd has been successful after a long career in avoiding the punishment that causes long-term damage. Nothing wrong with that. Sugar Ray Leonard did the same thing.... and look at him today.
I like fireworks in my boxing matches, but I can respect a great defensive fighter like Floyd, SRL, and others. In another thread, I encouraged discussion and comparisons between Floyd and Wladimir Klitschko. In my very personal opinion, they cannot be compared. Floyd's defensive skills are a marvel to look at. The shoulder rolls, the cat-like reflexes.... I've always enjoyed seeing the slo-mo's of Floyd pulling back from a punch... only to recoil back and hit the opponent with his own flush shot. Whereas my opinions on Wlad have always been clear. I'll always believe he never quite got over those early career KO losses... and his way of avoiding punishment is not by defensive wizardry... but by questionable tactics that tend to mar his fights and piss off fans wanting a good quality fight.
Would I have preferred that Floyd go for the kill against Pacquiao? Sure. A part of me wanted Pac to win... but only if Pac went in there with the skills and drive to beat Floyd. He fell woefully short, and the better man won. When I saw Pac had no chance against Floyd, I wanted Floyd to make it definitive by way of stoppage. But that's not Floyd's style. It's never been his style... so he shouldn't be criticized.
I've always known to separate the fighter from the man, his style from his results, etc., etc. So while I find Floyd to be less than an exemplary human being..... and while I find that I would prefer for Floyd to have a little more offense in his arsenal.... I can't fault him for finding a way to win every time out.
Actually i agree with your take on his athletic ability.
My argument isn't based on facts, rather my opinion that Floyd doesn't use combos because they are risky- rather the dude just can't me em look sweet:lickish:
Great Boxer
If we use Cassius Clay as an example {Oh Geez}, he didn't have 'one flaw', he had many.
But, the many flaws were often not discussed, because of his lightning speed.
It is speed coupled with quickness that can cover up for flaws.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Oh. Now I get it. The flaws are sometimes not seen. Like when you're under the covers in bed." ........... Donna Mills
http://img1.bdbphotos.com/images/ori...7.jpg?kj8as6ye
The most gifted fighter who lacked so much.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Paxtom
If Dundee had gotten him to go to the body, maybe he wouldn't have gone life and death with Frazier and Norton.
Dundee as much as i like him was basically a yes man for Ali. A GLORIFIED cheerleader.
Ali and RJJ relied on reflexes way too much.
When it left them, they didn't have skills that they honed.
Their workouts imo was about staying in shape, they both ate right, abstained from drugs, alcohol, but didn't have a plan (B)
,a recipe for a flawed fighter.
Reflexes as u stated- so fast, so agile their youth hid their flaws.