Least athletic SUCCESSFUL boxer in history

Doesn't seem like it, however.

 

No love for Tony Gelanto?

 

Foreman..

 

There was, six years back when this thread started...

 

Right my bad, when I read through It the first time I didn't see him mentioned atsch

 

50 yr old hopkins

 

By "powerful", I'm sure that they were talking about his punching power...not his sheer physical strength...and geez...what do those talking heads want anyway? Fullmer...if he had any ""power"" probably would have killed Benny Paret in the ring the night they fought...and would have probably done the same to Basilio and more than likely wold have beheaded SRR in their first fight.
Again, they simply CANNOT be talking abot his strength...I think Dick Tiger would be the only middle that could have been any stronger than Fullmer.

 

deal

 

Fullmer was as strong as a bull.

 

Joe Frazier easy.

He couldn't do anything else athletically, sprint, jump, swim etc...

 

I see it but I don believe it

 

Why not?

I have always maintained that Marciano was a freak of nature... and even head to head the greatest fighter under 200 pounds. This has been a consistent stance of mine for a long, long time.

 

You're trolling one minute with the homeboy who says he didnt fight good away from home and Weill maybe "knew" something next minute he's a freak of nature.

 

I don't know I saw him in that show where he competed against other people and seemed bad but consider the things he was doing. Bike, swimming, sprints and weights. If the events where a 5 mile run, who can throw 1000 punches on the bag the fastest and who was fastest on the speedbag and skipping he would annihilate. He looked extremely sharp in his prime, very fast and explosive.

When I think unathletic I think someone like Tex Cobb. He fought for the World Championship so he is by many definitions successful.