Are defensive fighters who didn't shoulder roll inferior to defensive fighters who shoulder rolled?

Only Toney did it almost exclusively.

 

Some guys use reflexes (Sweat Pea, Roy) some use their legs (Cory Spinks, Joey Archer) and some use the shoulder roll (Floyd, Toney and some simply use their guard or Parry (Winky, Archie) The effectiveness depends on the fighter more than the style.

 

Short answer no.
Benitez didnt roll. Loche didnt roll ect ect

 

This. You use the skills that you have developed. If Toney didn't get inside and shoulder roll he'd be a completely different fighter. Same with the reflexes of Whitaker and Jones. These guys were gym rats. They knew what worked for them and set them apart so they developed that particular skill set.

Good defense is good defense. There's different ways to go about it but they can all be effective if utilized correctly.

 

Not in the slightest, if you have a good defense it doesn't matter what technique is used providing it stops you getting hit, rarely gets mentioned in defensive threads for some reason but Marlon Starling's high guard is up there as one of the best defences ever on top of people already mentioned,

 

No because if you can move and use your feet, you really don't need it at all because you can make their right hand fall short by stepping back and countering, if you have slow feet it is useful because they're always in range to hit you so you have to be able to deflect punches, but footwork is more important, Ali, Lewis, Holmes, Klitschko's didn't need to be able to shoulder roll because they were able to keep their opponent away with the jab and straight punches and use their feet to make them fall short

 

Not one particular defense is better than other defensive skills. It just depends on the fighter and how they utilize it. Just because a fighter knows how to shoulder roll doesn't mean he's a better defensive fighter than a guy who knows how to use upper body movement for defense. Every form of defense has their holes and weaknesses depending on the fighters and style they face.

 

Not strictly necessary but I think it's very helpful in the later stages to avoid overly relying on movement and reflexes.

 

No, it was blocked because it was easily one of the worst threads of the year. If that thread wasn't a joke, I honestly don't know what to say to you. Here's a good breakdown of why Napoles fought that way against Monzon, from someone who actually knows Boxing. Napoles was also an alcoholic, natural 135lber, past prime, going up against an ATG 160lber. It is actually a testament to his greatness and skill he lasted as long as he did and even won early rounds.

The way you talk of Napoles indicates you have never watched his career, such as his stellar performance against Curtis Cokes in 1969, a top champion who did everything 'right' by your indications and still got destroyed.

This content is protected

This content is protected

 

What is your problem? You have some weird fixation on Classic fighters and shoulder rolling?

Why would Napoles shoulder roll and try and deflect punches from a much bigger, stronger, harder hitting man, who was known for expertly controlling the range? This would be both harmful for his body and would keep him well out of range, both for initiation and counters. He wouldn't be able to score nearly at the rate he did otherwise. This would be alright to try and stay in survival mode, but Napoles came to win and was a naturally (and well schooled) aggressive fighter. He just didn't box like this, and it wouldn't have worked for him anyway. His early aggression also allowed him to smother punch range when he came close.

Pulling back from the punches slightly was a part of Napoles movement style (he used it to set up dips and hooks of the jab, which he utlised expertly against Ernie Lopez), and actually worked for the first couple of rounds against Monzon. I guarantee you that any other Middleweight would not have adapted to it so quickly, though I will agree it is a technique much suited to his natural weight classes than 160, and your criticism of it is fine.

You seem to have some weird ideal in your head about Boxing, and if Boxers don't pertain to it, then they are 'less skilled'. You don't know as much as you think you do.