I'm bigger and stronger, so I'd be the one with the edge in clinches. I have a good jab and reach advantage, so it would be hard for him to come in and land. I can punch harder and I'm faster. Given what I've just said, I think it's more than ok for me to see myself as having a very good chance.
Is this the first time in ESB history we've had a poster who quite boxing at the age of 16, but genuinely deep down believes he would outbox and knockout a former world champion? I think it genuinely might be.
How can you know that you're stronger in clinches? Being bigger isn't enough, Sharkey overpowered some very strong clinchers with more experience on inside fighting than you. Again, it's not that simple because Sharkey was used to fight with reach disadvantage and he usually outjabbed bigger and longer opponents. Again - opponents with much bigger experience than you. You're faster than prime Sharkey? Are you Mike Tyson or what? You've said that, but if you really believe in what you said and you don't troll then you are dumber than I thought at first.
Think you highly under rate Louis and Marciano and other greats. I have no problem saying Jack Johnson and Jeffries couldn’t compete today because boxing was a different sport then. But to insist Louis And Marciano couldn’t beat some of these guys...strange really. I’d say Louis and Marciano were better then Douglas, Norton, Holyfield, Marshall, Rahman, Young. Wouldn’t you?
I don't think fundamentals are optional, style can be. If a fighter is bigger, stronger, faster, etc. than another then if the skills are close, the more physically gifted fighter can get away with doing things he wouldn't do against someone who matched up better physically. Ali did things against Jean Pierre Coopman that he wouldn't do against Frazier or Norton. Ali did some unconventional things at times, but he was sound fundamentally, his footwork, balance, etc. was ingrained. If a fighter without great fundamentals to start with did the things Ali did he probably wouldn't do well. Training Sharkey or Wilder would be two different things. Sharkey is a normal sized guy who is mostly a conventional fighter. Wilder is an athletic freak who started boxing late who has the misfortune of sharing an era with another huge athletic freak who has been boxing since he was a child. In most eras without a Tyson Fury, Wilder's physical gifts of height, length, speed, power, etc. would probably be all he needed. Of course it would be nice to see what Wilder would be like if he started boxing at 12, but that's not going to happen. The instinctive Wilder that creates and closes distance and knocks people out in 10 seconds or late in a fight is probably what we're going to have regardless of who trains him. If he catches Fury he could be back on top, if not, he'll probably always just be a guy who was not as good as Fury.
But Sharkey also had developed fundamentals, that's the point. You are giving fighters like Ali benefit of doubt, but you never do that with old timers. Sharkey knew all basics just fine, he just knew when to use non-conventional moves.
I don't see Marciano and Louis beating Holyfield. And they wouldn't find it easy to beat the rest. But I was originally comparing Marciano and Lewis with Ali, Tyson, Lewis, Bowe, etc - who in my opinion are superior.
