Chad Dawson most Offensively Complete Boxer

I think the OP has got a little too carried away but I rate pretty highly as well. Dawson v Calzaghe is the fight the fans should be calling for in 2009 not another Calzaghe v Hopkins snooze fest.

 

You rate Dawson as an average fighter?

 

Clearly a special talent, the slickest boxer from 160 above, Cunningham, Calzaghe and Hopkins included.

 

nop, sorry, average power

 

You are going well over-the-top. Dawson went life-and-death with Glen Johnson. I think Bernard Hopkins would comfortably outbox him. Dawson has potential and he does have blinding handspeed, but he is far from the finished article.

 

Stylisitically, Glen Johnson is a tough matchup for Dawson. Let's also not forget that Johnson is a pretty good fighter who's given plenty of top level fighters trouble. Although I could see Hopkins beating Dawson, no way in hell does Nard comfortably outbox him. There is a reason that Hopkins is not interested in fighting Dawson.

 

When is the last time you seen anybody dominate Johnson?He is a tough fight for every and anyone.

I like Chad and Glen even more.Watching that fight from a neutral standpoint Glen made it a hard competitive fight but did not do enough through the course of 12 rounds to take it.

 

edit

 

Dawson's showed zero adaptability in the Johnson fight, rather than adjust he simply just lost rounds which I dont think bodes well if he faced people with multi-faceted games like Hopkins and Calzaghe.

For all Dawson's physical attributes he seems lacking in boxing intelligence.

This combined with his leaky defence and questionable chin....to me he's another overhyped American fighter who people are hoping rather than thinking that he's going to be the next best thing.

Of course he'll have his chances to prove.

 

Dawson got himself in trouble by trying to fight inside too much with Johnson. However, he did box a little more towards the end of the fight. So I woudn't say he showed zero adaptability. Furthermore, it makes no sense to try to judge a fighters ability to adapt based on one fight. Also, there's no reason to bring up names like Calzaghe and Hopkins in relation to Chad. Neither one of those guys have showed any real interest in fighting Dawson. Calzaghe's even retired now, so he's irrelevant. The fact of the matter is, Euro posters have a tendency to label any young American fighter as overhyped(vice versa with Americans in relation to Euros). I've been watching the sport for about 20 years. Dawson is the real deal. I'm not saying he's a future ATG, but he's a very talented fighter. He's more underhyped rather than overhyped.

 

Yes but a fighter as ofensive as Dawson need to be more carefull about his ofensive skill if he wants to stay unbeaten and begin to protect better that shaky chin.

 

lmao

Look at his posting history. I fell for that too at one point. The guy is constantly anti-propogandizing Hopkins. He's a PHONY Hopkins fan (not that I give a ****), IMO. False flagging.

 

FAIL.

I'm a Hopkins fan, i just try to be objective. Let me respond to some of the comments which probably lead you to believe i'm not a Hopkins fan.

1) Yes, i think Dawson would beat Hopkins. Stylistically, he's wrong for Hopkins. It will probably be another JT/Hopkins fight where Dawson's athleticism and youth simply outworks Hopkins.

2) Yes, i think Calzaghe beat Hopkins. It wasn't pretty but based on how boxing is scored, he won the fight. Hopkins might've landed 5 of the 7 hardest/cleanest blows but that alone doesn't win you a fight.

3) Yes, i think Adamek would be a tough challenge for Hopkins.

Having said all that, i go into each fight thinking that whatever Hopkins does wouldn't shock me. But i try to be objective.

 

you can leave or cry or waht ever , but if you going to defend calzaghe after a bit of honest driticism thann you need to be a bit thicker skinned,

any way i never said joe was scared of dawson i said he was scared of losing his 0. which is pretty acurate. every1 knows that if joe decided to fight the deserved opponents @ lhw than he will no doubt eventually lose, his hole career has been cmaflagued by the fact that he has never lost, so if he does happen to lose the cracks in his resume will start looking like crators. he has always had the advantage goin into the fight, i mean he fights boxer that have past their best and fighters that should not be in their the first place but with the 0 he convinced some fans that hes an atg. and then when it comes time to prove yourself against the current best lhw in the world he retires, sorry, but if thats not runnninng from a fight? , how many times has hopkins, jones or delahoys fought the no 1 guy in their division regardless of if they are the underdogs, thats what makes a true champion, not by winning the easy fight or fight 40 year olds. the ironic thing is he said dawson doesnt deserve a fight with him after he fought 10 years of club fighters, thats just straight out arigance and cockiness