Originally Posted by Spitfire7
Versatility in common non-technical parlance, simply means adaptability, all-roundedness, dexterity, adjustability, etc. primarily. One who is versatile can adapt to anything, and can change from one state/quality to another with relative ease in relation to an immediate situation--and as such could imply variety, multiplicity, etc. secondarily. JMM has shown those qualities more than Pacquiao as the former had been put into more adverse and hard situations, even picking himself up from the canvas 4 times, but was able to adapt and adjust, even turn the tide in many rounds. That is adaptability more than variety/multiplicity per se.
If im not mistaken, you implied and must've meant by your usage of the word 'versatility' what boxing experts would specifically call "ring generalship" which is what ring IQ is all about...
I see where you're coming from mate. No disagreement here, just some minor and subjective semantics and subjective interpretations to help avoid moot misunderstanding.
And oh yeah, it's JM who i think is gonna taste the canvas again (as had been in the previous fights, but will be able to pick himself up yet again and box in spurts and even dominate to make it close, shades of fight 2).
ring generalship is control of the ring, controlling where the action takes place in the ring and at what pace, this is a part of Ring IQ not all of it.
Versatility in my opinion means the variety of skills shown and adaptability is part Versatility, by meaning you need slight variations to adapt, but not necessarily the change of styles, I personally feel that adaptability comes more under Ring IQ. I think the misunderstanding comes from the interpretation on the meaning of Versatility and adaptability in terms of boxing.
What ratings would give it then?