Everyone starts to learn somewhere. You pick up the fundamentals from (hopefully) a sound trainer, then develop according to your own physique and tendencies and your trainers particular flavour. I'm interested in how some of the greats might have been different with different styles. Case in particular point being Naseem Hamed. He had outstanding natural reflexes and power. But would he have been better or worse if he had come up with a trainer who instilled in him better boxing fundamentals and a more orthodox style? Could also look at someone like Foreman (who aspired to be another Ali until his trainers moulded him into a wrecking ball), but Hamed is probably the best example of what I'm talking about. Any thoughts?
Could would shoulda. What if Ali had crushing power, what if Julian Jackson was awesome defensively.........
Hamed success wouldn't have been the same without his weird style, because that made him unpredictable, he archived a lot with that style, Barrera had his number, no matter the type of style he used.
I think you're approaching the question from the wrong angle - or at least a different angle from the question posed. It's not about adding something a particular fighter didn't have in terms of physical gifts - not even about Hamed particularly, though he is a good example - more a question of how the same clay would have looked if moulded differently.
I agree in principle - but disagree on a technicality. Hamed proved that he didn't really have the heart to come back from a defeat and fight in the trenches. I think he'd lose once, maybe twice, and slip off quietly into retirement in his early twenties.
He would have been average at best. He was trained in a way that was deliberately unorthodox, meant to take advantage of the way 95% of other fighters were training. Hamed best asset was his insanely strong legs that he used to jump or leap into his punches, It's where that insane punching power came from. Without exploiting this natural asset quite as thoroughly he wouldn't have gotten as far as he did. It's why the lead uppercut worked so well for him, it's probably why he could lean back so far away from punches to evade them, It's why he could switch stances so quickly and hit with power from both. Brendan Ingle saw his natural assets and molded a style to maximize them as any good trainer should.
I've always thought of stuff like that, for instance how would Mike Tyson's career have faired had he used the same style as James Toney at heavyweight? He would have still had that speed and power no matter what. I suppose with Hamed being very short the style that he adopted benefited him as a fighter, he would have struggled more being orthodox imo....
I disagree with your first point Wass. I think a lot of Tyson's power was generated by forward momentum and in his prime he built speed exponentially as he got into a rhythm. He generated power by swift forward thrusts which he needed room to do. Toney's crafty defence and shoulder rolls made him harder to hit than Mike but had Mike used those moves, he'd have been denied room for leverage and subsequent power. Look how ineffective he was on the inside even in prime years.
He was ineffective mostly because he was lazy on the inside and let fighters tie him up not because of any technical weakness.
Absolutely. My point was that he needed movement to generate his power and speed. The more flatfooted Toney approach would have denied him that so, while he would have still had power and speed in his locker, doing a Toney would prevent him being able to fully call upon them.
None taken. Perhaps I didn't explain it well. I'm interested in how effective fighters like Hamed, Tyson, Foreman etc. might have been if they had been schooled in, and stuck to, different fighting styles. Tyson probably had the perfect style for his physical gifts. Hamed maybe could have been better with a more conventional style. it's all just opinion.
He would have been getting plenty of movement in the counter right hand after the shoulder roll. Tyson also had a wicked uppercut thrown from the spot.