Examples of boxers neutralizing the opponent's superior speed and athleticism

Athleticism is a term for those who can not imagine any attributes contributing to athletic excellence beyond the most ephemeral and obvious.

 

Taylors brain, face, and internal organs disagree.

 

if it been around 20 years perhaps its use has developed.

even obvious things need names.

obvious is usually correct

just because someone says something obvious doesn't mean they are a moron, or that they don't understand more difficult things. (Have you ever seen the black danny dyer's youtube predictions, he talks all this irrelevant technical stuff and ignores the obvious, making any predictions fairly pointless imo).

perhaps you could give a fuller definition of what you mean by it?

The dictionary gives a few definitions similar to mine, what you seem to be describing is that the winner of an athletic event, by definition was the most sucesfull athlete competing in that event. This is not a good indicator of who would win a sportsday with varied events between the competitiors.

when i am calculating odds i use athleticism as a standard factor and fitness as a variable factor to give me numbers for the physical side of the matchup. I need the standard factor and atheticism seems as good a word for it as any.

athleticism 
ath·let·ic[ath-let-ik] Show IPA
adjective
1.
physically active and strong; good at athletics or sports: an athletic child.
2.
of, like, or befitting an athlete.
3.
of or pertaining to athletes; involving the use of physical skills or capabilities, as strength, agility, or stamina: athletic sports; athletic training.
4.
for athletics: an athletic field.
5.
Psychology . (of a physical type) having a sturdy build or well-proportioned body structure. Compare asthenic ( def 2 ) , pyknic ( def 1 ) .

 

Are those the ways people are using it ?

Doesn't that include just about everyone good at boxing. These definitions seem to support Seamus's point that it's very broad an vague.

I might be wrong, but I think people are using it in some strange way that doesn't quite fit that.
Obviously, Tex Cobb had amazing athleticism, but i suspect that he wouldn't fit in with the "athleticism" people around here are talking about .... which my best guess would say is usually about speed, explosiveness and/or agility to the exclusion of other athletic traits.

 

i just copy and pasted the first search result because i mentioned the definition

seamus is right to say it shouldn't be used o the exclusion of the other factors, but it is one that imo needs considering to understand how tactics, fitness(short term, see above post), styles ect will play out. It is possible that I should always split up all the factors of athleticism, and that i don't do it for the sake of covering more matches(lots of tennis happens at the same time), but i honestly dont see much to be gained for the time it would take. (if djokovic has 1 agility and murray has .75 agility, i have a meaningless stat)

all athletes are by definition athletic,
that doesn't change the validity statement 'X is a better athlete/more athletic than Y'

neither doe the word imply only good things i.e 'rjj was a fantastic athlete' also means rjj was no mike mcalum

 

I think some of the picks on this thread illustrate the problem.
Mostly we are talking about world-class performers where the two fighters were equally athletic, or the better athlete won. The better athlete almost always wins, it's hard to think of a case where they won't happen, outside of some fluke of luck. I can't imagine a guy like Chavez, a physical phenomenon and an amazing fighter, being a lesser athlete to his opponent, never mind being a lesser athlete and still winning.

Anyway, the thread is "examples of fighters neutralising an opponent's superior speed and athleticism", so I guess it's easier to just ignore the 'athleticism' part, which is probably redundant. Unless it means 'agility' ?:huh
I'm still none the wiser. :good

 

True. You would almost never hear a fighter like Margarito or Froch described as athletic, despite the fact that they obviously have extreme stamina above and beyond that of most fighters, and were most likely always going to have that advantage even if they didn't train as hard as they do. Monzon would be an even better example.

For me the best athletes are those who can quickly learn new physical skills and apply them effectively in their field of endeavour. Mayweather, Ward and possibly Sergio Martinez would fit this definition (due to his ability to excel at boxing after a late start playing other sports). A fighter like Berto who's fast and explosive but has terrible stamina and an inability to take on new skills (watch his awful attempt to shoulder roll against Guerrero) does not qualify in this regard. He's fast and explosive, but not athletic.

 

**** yourself.

 

But Seamus is right anyway "athleticism" cannot be deduced to a boxer making flashy moves with his hands or feet or appearing agile. Marciano doesn't appear to have much "athleticism" if any, in that he's not fast, flash or coordinated yet has extreme attributes that would have to fall under "athleticism" like stamina and strength.

 

Exactly. A fighter with brute natural strength or stamina above and beyond the norm is just as eligible to the "athleticism" tag and some fancy-pants showboating speed merchant. Won't ever hear the above fighters referred to as athletic though.

 

You can call it Athleticism whatever you guys want.. just don't and convince me Chavez neatralized Taylor.

 

Taylor out-athleted him but Chavez had a higher motor and brought his lunch pail.

 

Constantly timing him, catching him with hard damaging shots even tho he's speed was not anywhere remotley close to Taylors and finally stopping him in the 12th.

Ya, i'd say he neutralized him alright.