Who comes close to being a "perfect fighter?"

PBF at 130 especially in his fight at 130 against Chico was boxing master. Great lateral movement, good defense, good power, quick accurate shots, countering and ring generalship. That fight against Chico was the best display of boxing I've seen in this era. Quite simply a master class performance at the highest level of the sport.

 

Toney: Check my avatar. One of my all-time favourites.

McCallum: The same. Huge fan.

Toney v McCallum I is one of my top 5 or so fights of all-time, I absolutely love it (I had Toney winning).

Arguello: Again, I adore the guy. I love his virtuoso performances (eg Escaleras), his lesser well known performances (eg Cocoa Sanchez) and even his losses (eg Pryor I). His entire career is a joy. I believe Alexis was the greatest 'puncher' ever, all things considered. His power, accuracy and variation were superb. Who else has ever hit as well to both the head and body?

Benitez: Not a personal favourite of mine, but I very much respect his ability and his achievements.

 

Good stuff! McCallum is the most underrated fighter of his era.

 

Word!!! And thanks for the Vids!

PS...Does anybody know where to find a compilation of Floyds earlier fights and the music has lyrics that say: "come and get your love" ...really funky type song. I suck at computerz and I loved that one. If anybody knows, PM me please.

 

I always thought Julio Cesar Chavez was the very best at mixing it up to body and head, but Alexis is definitely in that league.

My picks for being close to perfect would be the obvious ones really; Arguello, Robinson, Whitaker, Leonard, and I felt some talents that didn't really fufill itself at a time were pretty complete fighters; Nunn and Curry for example. I thought they had everything at one time or another but just couldn't sustain it.

 

Willie Pep

 

Bernard Hopkins.

 

Chavez may have been a better combination puncher, but he was not as good a puncher as Arguello in the purest sense. Arguello had better power to the head and body IMO, his punching technique was second to none.

Who do you think was the greater fighter at their peak: Nunn or Curry?

 

Not Hearns. Leonard in my opinion is probably the MOST complete fighter, actually. I just said Hopkins above, but that's just one person I'd put forward as a pick.

If I had to pick just one, it'd likely be Leonard. That guy was SERIOUS business in the ring. He could absolutely do it all.

 

Hearns with a granite chin wouldn't even have been fair. If you couldn't knock him out, how do you beat him at his best? He'd be a definite contender for top spot with that.

 

Pep was definitely a great boxer, but I don't think he really comes in as a real contender for top spot in this category of "perfect fighter", which would be overall, I think.

 

For these reasons Hopkins has to enter the discussion. Good post.

 

Absolutely :good Arguello was the more devastating puncher, and probably had the most flawless technique of all the champions in history. At least I think so.

My knowledge on Curry ain't to great, but he got more work done at the highest level than Nunn seemed too. Michael looked fantastic against Tate and Kalamby, but was criticised for his performances after that, against an aging Starling and of course, Barkely. Curry looked better on a more consistant basis, and can attribute his first professional loss to weight issues, whereas Nunn just ran into an exceptional fighter in Toney.

Curry.

 

:good

 

Winky-big power puncher

Mayorga-defensive genious

Khan-chin of steel

Clottey-great voice and speaker

Mayweather-humble fighter

I'm not sure I'm I'm on subject at all with this...