Who comes close to being a "perfect fighter?"

[DAWGSWIN]

On his day, Tommy Hearns had everything. When it wasn't he saw arena lights!

My man Hagler looks perfect in the record book, as well as in some of his more famous fights.

Shane Mosely is as close to perfect, on occasion, as I think I've seen recently.

Roy in his prime was impressive.

There is no perfect fighter, only great fighters who have perfect nights!

BTW I am drunkly watching Mosely/Margarito for the umpteenth time! Can't get enough!

[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.

[ICB]

motivated lennox lewis
pernell whitaker

Lennox couldnt really fight on the inside , and as great as sweatpea was he lacked power.

Pernell Whitaker had more power than you think, the reason he didn't have a higher KO precentage. Is because he was mostly on the backfoot concentrating on defense, but when he needed to come forward and exchange he could.

I mean he was able to stun JCC a few times, he also badly hurt Felix Trinidad. And he KO'ed Disobelys Hurtado in one of the most brutal KO's i've ever seen. Im not saying he was a puncher because he clearly wasn't, but i do think his power was underrated.

[holmcall]

On his day, Tommy Hearns had everything. When it wasn't he saw arena lights!

My man Hagler looks perfect in the record book, as well as in some of his more famous fights.

Shane Mosely is as close to perfect, on occasion, as I think I've seen recently.

Roy in his prime was impressive.

There is no perfect fighter, only great fighters who have perfect nights!

BTW I am drunkly watching Mosely/Margarito for the umpteenth time! Can't get enough!

But Lopez, Sanchez and Jofre probably sustained "close to perfection" longer than most, don't you think?

[ICB]

On his day, Tommy Hearns had everything. When it wasn't he saw arena lights!

My man Hagler looks perfect in the record book, as well as in some of his more famous fights.

Shane Mosely is as close to perfect, on occasion, as I think I've seen recently.

Roy in his prime was impressive.

There is no perfect fighter, only great fighters who have perfect nights!

BTW I am drunkly watching Mosely/Margarito for the umpteenth time! Can't get enough!

But Lopez, Sanchez and Jofre probably sustained "close to perfection" longer than most, don't you think?

As much as i love Salvador Sanchez, i don't think he sustained perfection. He had struggles against Patrick Ford, Pat Cowdell, and he was arguably losing to a novice Azumah Nelson, who fought a very good fight. But obviously wasn't in his peak, but neither was Salvador Sanchez IMO.

Salvador Sanchez is great but he hadn't reached his peak yet, so he obviously was not the perfect fighter yet. Ricardo Lopez i agree on he had it all. Eder Jofre haven't seen alot of so i can't comment.

[holmcall]

On his day, Tommy Hearns had everything. When it wasn't he saw arena lights!

My man Hagler looks perfect in the record book, as well as in some of his more famous fights.

Shane Mosely is as close to perfect, on occasion, as I think I've seen recently.

Roy in his prime was impressive.

There is no perfect fighter, only great fighters who have perfect nights!

BTW I am drunkly watching Mosely/Margarito for the umpteenth time! Can't get enough!

But Lopez, Sanchez and Jofre probably sustained "close to perfection" longer than most, don't you think?

As much as i love Salvador Sanchez, i don't think he sustained perfection. He had struggles against Patrick Ford, Pat Cowdell, and he was arguably losing to a novice Azumah Nelson, who fought a very good fight. But obviously wasn't in his peak, but neither was Salvador Sanchez IMO.

Salvador Sanchez is great but he hadn't reached his peak yet, so he obviously was not the perfect fighter yet. Ricardo Lopez i agree on he had it all. Eder Jofre haven't seen alot of so i can't comment.

I don't think there was ever such a thing as a "novice Nelson" given his great amature career

Back in 1982, a tough fighter out of Zambia named Charm “Shuffle” Chiteule, who did much of his work in Germany and the U.K., fought a Ghanaian by the name of Azumah Nelson. At stake was the prestigious African Featherweight Title which Nelson had won in 1981 by knocking out AustralianBrian Roberts in the fifth stanza in Accra, Ghana.

This fight was held at the Woodlands Stadium in Lusaka, Zambia. Nelson was 11-0 while the slick “Shuffle,” who became the number one contender to the Commonwealth title, came in at 19-1. Chiteule had won the Zambian Featherweight Title in 1979 while Nelson had taken the Ghanaian featherweight title in 1980. Nelson knocked out Chiteule in the tenth round and in so doing was able to get a shot at the world title just five months later. Still, only aficionados knew who he was and that his amateur record (50-1) was an outstanding one.

[Master]

Roy Jones
Pernell Whitaker
Mike Tyson
JCC

[holmcall]

SANCHEZ HAD PULLED AHEAD OF NELSON PRIOR TO THE STOPPAGE. Tony Castellano 135-131 | judge: Al Reid 132-133 | judge: Artie Aidala 134-131

[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?

[ICB]

But Lopez, Sanchez and Jofre probably sustained "close to perfection" longer than most, don't you think?

As much as i love Salvador Sanchez, i don't think he sustained perfection. He had struggles against Patrick Ford, Pat Cowdell, and he was arguably losing to a novice Azumah Nelson, who fought a very good fight. But obviously wasn't in his peak, but neither was Salvador Sanchez IMO.

Salvador Sanchez is great but he hadn't reached his peak yet, so he obviously was not the perfect fighter yet. Ricardo Lopez i agree on he had it all. Eder Jofre haven't seen alot of so i can't comment.

I don't think there was ever such a thing as a "novice Nelson" given his great amature career

Back in 1982, a tough fighter out of Zambia named Charm “Shuffle” Chiteule, who did much of his work in Germany and the U.K., fought a Ghanaian by the name of Azumah Nelson. At stake was the prestigious African Featherweight Title which Nelson had won in 1981 by knocking out AustralianBrian Roberts in the fifth stanza in Accra, Ghana.

This fight was held at the Woodlands Stadium in Lusaka, Zambia. Nelson was 11-0 while the slick “Shuffle,” who became the number one contender to the Commonwealth title, came in at 19-1. Chiteule had won the Zambian Featherweight Title in 1979 while Nelson had taken the Ghanaian featherweight title in 1980. Nelson knocked out Chiteule in the tenth round and in so doing was able to get a shot at the world title just five months later. Still, only aficionados knew who he was and that his amateur record (50-1) was an outstanding one.

A great amateur career doesn't prepare you, for a fighter like Salvador Sanchez. I love Salvador Sanchez but the fact is Azumah Nelson was still learning, plus he only had 2 weeks to prepare. A rematch would of been something else, because Salvador Sanchez would have improved by that time aswell.

[holmcall]

As much as i love Salvador Sanchez, i don't think he sustained perfection. He had struggles against Patrick Ford, Pat Cowdell, and he was arguably losing to a novice Azumah Nelson, who fought a very good fight. But obviously wasn't in his peak, but neither was Salvador Sanchez IMO.

Salvador Sanchez is great but he hadn't reached his peak yet, so he obviously was not the perfect fighter yet. Ricardo Lopez i agree on he had it all. Eder Jofre haven't seen alot of so i can't comment.

I don't think there was ever such a thing as a "novice Nelson" given his great amature career

Back in 1982, a tough fighter out of Zambia named Charm “Shuffle” Chiteule, who did much of his work in Germany and the U.K., fought a Ghanaian by the name of Azumah Nelson. At stake was the prestigious African Featherweight Title which Nelson had won in 1981 by knocking out AustralianBrian Roberts in the fifth stanza in Accra, Ghana.

This fight was held at the Woodlands Stadium in Lusaka, Zambia. Nelson was 11-0 while the slick “Shuffle,” who became the number one contender to the Commonwealth title, came in at 19-1. Chiteule had won the Zambian Featherweight Title in 1979 while Nelson had taken the Ghanaian featherweight title in 1980. Nelson knocked out Chiteule in the tenth round and in so doing was able to get a shot at the world title just five months later. Still, only aficionados knew who he was and that his amateur record (50-1) was an outstanding one.

A great amateur career doesn't prepare you, for a fighter like Salvador Sanchez. I love Salvador Sanchez but the fact is Azumah Nelson was still learning, plus he only had 2 weeks to prepare. A rematch would of been something else, because Salvador Sanchez would have improved by that time aswell.

EEragh!!

[ICB]

I don't think there was ever such a thing as a "novice Nelson" given his great amature career

Back in 1982, a tough fighter out of Zambia named Charm “Shuffle” Chiteule, who did much of his work in Germany and the U.K., fought a Ghanaian by the name of Azumah Nelson. At stake was the prestigious African Featherweight Title which Nelson had won in 1981 by knocking out AustralianBrian Roberts in the fifth stanza in Accra, Ghana.

This fight was held at the Woodlands Stadium in Lusaka, Zambia. Nelson was 11-0 while the slick “Shuffle,” who became the number one contender to the Commonwealth title, came in at 19-1. Chiteule had won the Zambian Featherweight Title in 1979 while Nelson had taken the Ghanaian featherweight title in 1980. Nelson knocked out Chiteule in the tenth round and in so doing was able to get a shot at the world title just five months later. Still, only aficionados knew who he was and that his amateur record (50-1) was an outstanding one.

A great amateur career doesn't prepare you, for a fighter like Salvador Sanchez. I love Salvador Sanchez but the fact is Azumah Nelson was still learning, plus he only had 2 weeks to prepare. A rematch would of been something else, because Salvador Sanchez would have improved by that time aswell.

EEragh!!

LOL relax old man i respect your opinion, and i love Salvador Sanchez. But i disagree with you slightly.

[holmcall]

[Spicoli]

I really dont think there is such a thing.Even the slightest uptight,burned out cynical boxing fan can find fault