The best fighter you've seen

I feel Duran was actually better technically than Hopkins, just not from a textbook standpoint. I know you have your stylistic preferences, but I assumed this was talking more about fighters in terms of how effective they were rather than how sound fundamentally, otherwise guys much less proven (or not at all) with a textbook style could rank above guys like Duran, Pep, or Jones Jr.

 

Probably Ali on film . Live would have to be Hatton .

 

Whitaker, Duran, Jones, Dempsey, Ali and Robinson have impressed me the most on film, off the top of my head.

 

The best fighters I have ever seen are (the usual suspects) Duran, Jones Jr and Whitaker. Duran against Leonard is the best performance by any fighter ever IMO, taking into consideration that Duran was moving up in weight and fighting one of the very best welterweights of all-time. I think Duran would've beaten almost any other ww in history that night, except Robinson and possibly Hearns. I would fancy him against any of the other 147 greats, even guys like Griffith and Gavilan - I really think Duran was incredible that night... yet he was even better towards the end of his lightweight days.

Jones Jr 1994-96 at smw and Whitaker's performances against Haughen, Nelson, Ramirez II, McGirt and Chavez - these are the other best fighters I have ever seen.

Of course Leonard and Ali could be in that top three, but they didn't impress me as much for as prolonged spells as the other three.

I cannot include Robinson as I have never seen him fight at his 147 peak.

 

Duran at lightweight just sums up what a fighter should be to me...the most naturally gifted fighter Ive seen.

I guess the best Ive seen live would be :think Actually Shannon Taylor believe it or not. He was a very good contender before he hit the coke, I saw him twice.

 

I feel so validated.

 

Even if middleweight isnt Robinson's best weight...he is still one of the best all around fighters I have ever watched on film.

 

As McGrain said earlier, Robinson's performance against LaMotta when winning the title at middleweight was awesome.

 

I agree somewhat with most of the above.

 

Well, it's obviously a matter of taste when we're talking about fighters on how strong or weak they were funtamentally. Duran and Hopkins were both very well rounded, no question. While Duran was no slouch when it came to accuracy, technique, etc, he wasn't as strong as Hopkins' in those areas. It's just pure personal taste at the end of the day. I think Hopkins was a more refined and economical fighter with his punches, and I also prefer the technical delivery of his shots compared to Duran.

I know what your talking about with your closing words above. We can't have a fighter who's career was brief, fighting nobodies, and he beats his opposition as well as possible to a certain individuals liking yet his resume is poor. It would be hard to make a case for that type of fighter being "the best I have ever seen"

Hopkins was a very effective fighter and was technically among the best ever IMO. Some other people might opt for a more unorthodox and technically flawed fighter, eg; Jones or Ali, even though style wise and technically they were different to Hopkins yet equally as effective.

 

If precision and refinement are your criteria then why not put someone like Winky Wright no.1? He outlanded Bernard and was more precise as well. More fighters fought well against Winky in his prime than they did against Bernard, but then again, Winky fought better fighters in his prime.

 

The best fighters I've seen ability wise are Henry Armstrong and Roberto Duran. Very close between the two, perhaps with an edge going to Duran.