I just thought it was when the boxer was at his best!
Sometimes it's not obvious when the boxer is at their best.
Loads of factors in place, difficult to judge.
I just thought it was when the boxer was at his best!
Sometimes it's not obvious when the boxer is at their best.
Loads of factors in place, difficult to judge.
In boxing it's hard to consider a fighter's prime. Usually it means when a fighter is at his best. That's the general consensus, regardless if he's in his physical prime or not. Meldrick Taylor was one of the best talents in boxing I've seen. But I remember watching the HBO documentary on his fight with JCC and they said something like this, "A fighter can lose years of his prime in a brutal fight like that." And Taylor was basically a shot fighter at around 27 or 28 because of too many brutal wars. Even though Taylor was in his physical prime he was past his boxing prime.
ANother example would be Muhammad ALi who was in his physical prime at 29 against Frazier in their first fight but was actually somewhat past his boxing prime because of the long layoff and he was never the same Ali of the 66-67 one before he was ban.
Another example would be Bernard Hopkins who I felt was in his boxing prime when he was 30 years old and that's when you start losing your physical prime. Hopkins was just a better fighter in his 30's than when he was in his physical prime of his 20s.
So imo "prime" means when a boxer is at his best, and it doesn't have to mean in his physical prime.
There are certain situations where you can say a fighter is not 'prime' such as the Ali who came back after years off suspended or the Ray Leonard who returned to fight Hagler. However, I think people often tend to use it as a way to excuse a loss by a previously unbeaten fighter who looked unstoppable, such as in the case of Tyson or Don Curry. I can agree that the Tyson who came out of jail was not prime, but the guy who fought Douglas, underprepared or not, was still a prime fighter.
A fighters prime to me is when a fighter is at the physical and mental peak.
For example, Hopkins prime never started till 1997 imo and his prime continued on till 2004, To some people that may be me excusing his loss to Jones (in 93) And his close losses to Taylor (twice in 2005) and Calzaghe (in 2008 ).
Last edited by Pugilistic; 07-26-2009 at 11:59 AM.
Prime is mostly rubbish (unless blatanly obvious a fighter is way past his best and shouldn't be fighting) because physical and mental prime occur at different times and, as Jaz touched on, it's mainly used to excuse a great fighters defeat.
He was too old, too green, had too much money, wasn't motivated because of his small purse, was weight drained, was too small moving up, had a bad training camp, needed to do a shit, had the wrong socks etc....
The problem with assessing boxing compared with other sports is most fighters only ever meet once, so whenever a close fight happens it's impossible to determine who the greater fighter really is.
Even matched fighters would probably need to meet a minimum of five times to get an accurate result. As many rematch results show, the form can be instantly turned round.
3-Time SADDO PREDICTION COMP CHAMPION.
A fighter's prime is that brief stretch of time where physical ability and ring knowledge intersect.
A fighter's prime is when he's experienced enough to have a complete understanding of what he's doing in the ring, but he's still at a young enough age where his raw physical skills haven't begun to deteriorate at all.
"Sixty forty I kicks yo' ass, Sixty forty I tears yo' ass up" - Roy Jones
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks