Boxing  

Forum Home Boxing Forum European British Classic Aussie MMA Training
Go Back   Boxing News 24 Forum > Boxing > Classic Boxing Forum


Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 03-13-2012, 08:05 PM   #16
McGrain
Diamond Dog
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 36,381
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Is Technical Perfection More Important Than Speed/Power?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ThinBlack View Post
Yes, see Watts-Davis Jr.
You are making me ****ing crazy now, kid.
McGrain is online now  Top
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old 03-13-2012, 08:50 PM   #17
Liechhardt
Contender
ESB Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 755
vCash: 500
Default Re: Is Technical Perfection More Important Than Speed/Power?

Yes. Look at Roy Jones. You lose your speed you don't lose your style.
Liechhardt is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 03-13-2012, 11:35 PM   #18
red cobra
Undisputed Champion
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: The Sea of Tranquility
Posts: 13,039
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Is Technical Perfection More Important Than Speed/Power?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ThinBlack View Post
Yes, see Watts-Davis Jr.
very good example.
red cobra is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 03-13-2012, 11:37 PM   #19
red cobra
Undisputed Champion
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: The Sea of Tranquility
Posts: 13,039
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Is Technical Perfection More Important Than Speed/Power?

Quote:
Originally Posted by McGrain View Post
You are making me ****ing crazy now, kid.
But Mcgrain...this is a very good call on how a solid, technically adept pro beats a highly talented speedster who was reckoned to make the Scot a victim and garner his first of many titles.
red cobra is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 03-13-2012, 11:44 PM   #20
Vic-JofreBRASIL
Champion
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 8,697
vCash: 1166
Default Re: Is Technical Perfection More Important Than Speed/Power?

Red, I think McGrain is mad with ThinBlack because he is bumping inumerous threads that are like 4, 5 years ago, all day, every day...

This thread is from ****ing 2007!
But it is a very good thread though....
Vic-JofreBRASIL is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-2012, 01:31 AM   #21
ripcity
Undisputed Champion
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: "Somebody may beat me, but they are going to have to bleed to do it."
Posts: 10,216
vCash: 606
Default Re: Is Technical Perfection More Important Than Speed/Power?

If we are talking about one fight I'd go with Speed/Power. Roy Jones Jr. May be the best head to head/prime vs. prime boxer ever. What did he have going for himself? Speed and power.

If we are talking about a career. I'd rather have Technical Perfection. Here we see Jones weakness. When his speed goes. He's not anywhere as good as he was when he had it.

The truly great ones have both. There are plenty of guys with all the physical gifts who never come close to being what they could have been in the ring. My theory is that being naturaly gifted leads to beliving that you only need to reliy on these gifts and less time is spent in preperation. This goes for everything not just boxing. Whenn you combine a good amount of talent with hard work you get the truly greats.
I belive that Jones has way more talent than Floyd Mayweather Jr. However, Mayweather has had the better career. I'm not saying jones is a slacker, but he never really mastered the basics. Mayweather is known for his training. While Mayweather is extremely talented that talent alone dose not explaine his secuess.
I think the one of the best arguments for Technical Perfection is Juan Manuel Marquez. He's nearly as naturaly gifted as the rest of today's top boxers. However, he's pretty close to being Techanay perfect as a counter puncher as you can get. He's 38 years old and the best lightweight in the world. Outside of Timothy Bradley, I'd favor him over anyone at light welterweight as well.
ripcity is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-2012, 07:22 AM   #22
red cobra
Undisputed Champion
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: The Sea of Tranquility
Posts: 13,039
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Is Technical Perfection More Important Than Speed/Power?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vic-JofreBRASIL View Post
Red, I think McGrain is mad with ThinBlack because he is bumping inumerous threads that are like 4, 5 years ago, all day, every day...

This thread is from ****ing 2007!
But it is a very good thread though....
you're right...
red cobra is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-2012, 07:44 AM   #23
salty trunks
Contender
ESB Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 1,192
vCash: 500
Default Re: Is Technical Perfection More Important Than Speed/Power?

Not always. Speed is the single most important factor in boxing. It can offset technique and power. Technical perfection can also offset speed and power but if I had to choose between the two Im taking speed. For example look what Roy Jones was able to do for so long against a laundry list of solid technicians. The way he made James Toney look should be your clue.
salty trunks is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-2012, 07:51 AM   #24
salty trunks
Contender
ESB Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 1,192
vCash: 500
Default Re: Is Technical Perfection More Important Than Speed/Power?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stonehands89 View Post
Boxing is about skills first, not talent. Speed, for example, is the greatest gift a fighter can have but it can be overcome by several things found in the boxer's figurative tool box. That ain't a theory.

Everyone brings up Ali and Jones and Hamed as examples to somehow prove that talent is better than mastery of the fundamentals, but all three of them were exceptional talents. They are exceptions that prove the rule. What beat them? Superior athletes? No, sound strategy and fundamentals.

The vast majority of natual talent do not come back to the gym after a few sparring sessions. Once they realize that fast hands and good reflexes won't save them from concussions, they go back to basketball courts.
No not really. Roy Jones was not technically a great fighter but his speed against a guy like James Toney for example completely offset any strategy or fundamentals he had. Reggie Johnson was also a very good boxer and was completely befuddled.
Mike Tyson is another good example. A short stocky pressure fighter who should have been offset by the many good tall boxers he faced but his speed, not so much his power is what allowed him to keep guys in check. He was so fast and hard to hit he was hitting guys before they could set and react.

Speed is the top of the mountain everything else falls in behind it.
salty trunks is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-2012, 07:58 AM   #25
PowerPuncher
P4P King
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 20,545
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Is Technical Perfection More Important Than Speed/Power?

You need a combination of everything. Even Willie Pep got bulldozed by a much inferior technician because Saddler was much stronger than him. Archie Moore a great technician got treated like a speed ball by the faster Patterson
PowerPuncher is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-2012, 01:00 PM   #26
Stonehands89
Champion
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 5,208
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Is Technical Perfection More Important Than Speed/Power?

Quote:
Originally Posted by salty trunks View Post
No not really. Roy Jones was not technically a great fighter but his speed against a guy like James Toney for example completely offset any strategy or fundamentals he had. Reggie Johnson was also a very good boxer and was completely befuddled.
Mike Tyson is another good example. A short stocky pressure fighter who should have been offset by the many good tall boxers he faced but his speed, not so much his power is what allowed him to keep guys in check. He was so fast and hard to hit he was hitting guys before they could set and react.

Speed is the top of the mountain everything else falls in behind it.
In terms of the best athletic talent, speed is at the top. But it cannot be counted on to defeat technique by itself. Anyone who has spent more than two weeks in a gym should know that.

And let's not get into throwing out examples because I can give you a hundred where technicians eat speedsters.

Jones vs. anyone before Tarver II proves nothing at all. Again, he is an exception that proves the rule, and he is not representative of speed guys. As for Tyson, speed alone is not what got him to the heights. It was his style, which was rooted in very solid fundamentals and a keen understanding of how to fight bigger and taller heavyweights. Speed was the perfect complement, but if he just had fast and heavy hands it wouldn't have made the difference.
Stonehands89 is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-2012, 01:04 PM   #27
Stonehands89
Champion
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 5,208
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Is Technical Perfection More Important Than Speed/Power?

Quote:
Originally Posted by PowerPuncher View Post
You need a combination of everything. Even Willie Pep got bulldozed by a much inferior technician because Saddler was much stronger than him. Archie Moore a great technician got treated like a speed ball by the faster Patterson
Saddler was highly skilled.

Patterson was highly skilled.

If you had to choose between the two, would you rather have fast hands and bum technique, or slow hands and sound technique?
Stonehands89 is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-2012, 01:18 PM   #28
McGrain
Diamond Dog
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 36,381
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Is Technical Perfection More Important Than Speed/Power?

One thing. I think Jones was more technically skilled than he is generally given credit for. For example he punches very correctly more often than he does something utterly bizarre (like KO someone with a left hook with all the torque coming from the opposite side, or something). It's true that he didn't defend himself in the usual way and that he used speed to defend himself. That is fair to say. But I would like to point out that at the same time as his speed started to desert him, so did his legs. The damage was mostly done in terms of his performance because he went to the ropes and stood there covered up (With a pretty decent technical guard!) and let the likes of Glen Johnson batter him.

I'm not holding him as a paradigm example of technical boxing of course, i'm just saying that I think the argument at both ends of his career gets highly exaggerated. He fought with more "correctly" than generally given credit for early in his career. Here entering his absolute prime against Tate for example, he fights well from a technical perspective, if not flawlessly:

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iXSxvqO7jXM[/ame]

And later in his career his failings were about more than his beginning to lack speed and his technical shortcomings being exposed. Bad legs are the toughest thing to cover up with speed just as they are the toughest thing to cover up with technical acumen, though the later is obviously easier than the former.
McGrain is online now  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-2012, 01:26 PM   #29
MagnaNasakki
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 3,829
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Is Technical Perfection More Important Than Speed/Power?

I'd rather be good, personally.

Super speed is very difficult to counter, but there is always a decent chance even the fastest guy makes mistakes an amazing technician can capitalize on.

I acknowledge fast guys are exceptionally tough to be, but I'd rather fight a perfect fight, myself.

Juan Manuel Marquez is a perfect example. Arguably beat Manny Pacquiao three times, and he's an inferior athlete in every way. Why did he have such stunning success? Manny is so dependent on his speed, he makes a ton of mistakes that a fighter as good as Marquez can capitalize on.

In summary, I believe the flaw in speed is that a boxer can become reliant on it, and his attention and focus can slip. A technician is more or less safe in most situations. Also, they rarely ever have the massive falling off at the end of their careers that leads to all the brain damage.

A lot of people will point to certain fights where speedsters eat technicians, but in all these examples, the speedy man mentioned is actually a fine technical boxer in his own right.
MagnaNasakki is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-2012, 01:32 PM   #30
MagnaNasakki
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 3,829
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Is Technical Perfection More Important Than Speed/Power?

Quote:
Originally Posted by McGrain View Post
One thing. I think Jones was more technically skilled than he is generally given credit for. For example he punches very correctly more often than he does something utterly bizarre (like KO someone with a left hook with all the torque coming from the opposite side, or something). It's true that he didn't defend himself in the usual way and that he used speed to defend himself. That is fair to say. But I would like to point out that at the same time as his speed started to desert him, so did his legs. The damage was mostly done in terms of his performance because he went to the ropes and stood there covered up (With a pretty decent technical guard!) and let the likes of Glen Johnson batter him.

I'm not holding him as a paradigm example of technical boxing of course, i'm just saying that I think the argument at both ends of his career gets highly exaggerated. He fought with more "correctly" than generally given credit for early in his career. Here entering his absolute prime against Tate for example, he fights well from a technical perspective, if not flawlessly:

[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

And later in his career his failings were about more than his beginning to lack speed and his technical shortcomings being exposed. Bad legs are the toughest thing to cover up with speed just as they are the toughest thing to cover up with technical acumen, though the later is obviously easier than the former.
I agree with this post.

I think the biggest thing Roy Jones did wrong in his prime that started getting him in huge trouble later was back straight up. He had such amazing legs in his prime it didn't matter how he moved, man could clear 8 feet in a second, and hit you three times while he did so.

Now, its almost easy to bully Roy around because he'll go straight back to the ropes. Watching a smaller Calzaghe bully him like he was a boy fighting a man is an incredibly illuminating lesson of what Roy's footwork without his amazing legs and explosiveness is: Bum. He still throws great combos, he's still accurate, still has a great high guard, but because he can be bulled around and hit, he can be stopped.

Even the Green fight. The second Green decided to actually launch a serious attack, he backed Roy right up and cracked him.

Roy is an underrated technician, but even his technique was rooted in his talent. I would never, ever, ever teach a young fighter to fight like Roy Jones.
MagnaNasakki is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Reply

Boxing News 24 Forum > Boxing > Classic Boxing Forum

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump





All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:38 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Boxing News 24 Forum 2013