Who comes close to being a "perfect fighter?"

[Jimanuel Boogustus]

I look at Style rather than substance... (lol)
I know that sounds ridiculous to say but in boxing you really only need two things.

1. The right game plan
2. The right temperament to carry out that game plan.

Hence for me... In the most un-text book of ways, a prime Bernard Hopkins was an ultimate fighting machine.

For me, a man who can orchestrate himself in such a way were there's an answer for everything (And stylistically Nard had an answer for everything) is the perfect fighter.

I never used to like Bernard but his older footage is just 100% Gold.

[El Kabong]

I look at Style rather than substance... (lol)
I know that sounds ridiculous to say but in boxing you really only need two things.

1. The right game plan
2. The right temperament to carry out that game plan.

Hence for me... In the most un-text book of ways, a prime Bernard Hopkins was an ultimate fighting machine.

For me, a man who can orchestrate himself in such a way were there's an answer for everything (And stylistically Nard had an answer for everything) is the perfect fighter.

I never used to like Bernard but his older footage is just 100% Gold.

....I think he gave away too many rounds, if you GIVE AWAY 2-3 rounds then you give your opponent too much of an opportunity to win and the judges too much of an opportunity to screw you which is why if Hopkins could either punch harder or had a motor like Marvin Hagler or had the hand speed of a Roy Jones Jr...all things that would keep him from giving rounds away, then he would be "perfect"

[Jimanuel Boogustus]

What round are you refering to? The 14 rounds he gave to Taylor or the 6 he gave to Calzaghe?