The perfect style?

Efren Torres looked pretty textbook as well.

Bet you kicked yourself afterwards?

 

Well, personally I'm not sure that there is such a thing as a "perfect style". If I were teaching somebody with no particularly unique physical aspects, I'd probably just emphasise technical competence more than anything.

 

I still do GPater...He was prematurely all white haired and looked so alone!..I then knew about his addiction to pain killers for malaria, knew about his seperation from his wife,etc...But I also knew about his great career in the ring...I remember saying to myself,should i offer him a drink, knowing his problem, or should I just avoid speaking to this true American and boxing hero...I opted for the latter...b.b.

 

I would choose Harold Johnson, Tommy Loughran or Jose Napoles (maybe in this case I'd be setting an impossible standard)..

 

Well that's a different question. Probably Hopkins and Louis taken together.

 

I feel similarly about Napoles, he'd be one of the first and foremost choices in my mind, because of his ability to go inside to the body etc, but you can't teach that ultimate slickness at the highest level. So i'd opt for someone like Johnson or Hopkins likely.

 

No love for Archie Moore?

 

Great answer, if a may say so. You and I usually battle it out when talking about the great Harry Greb, but you apparently aren't completely insane, as you have a fine pick in Ricardo Lopez. :good

 

If it was a southpaw, I'd use Watt. He wasn't fast, nor an overwhelmingly hard puncher, not particularly resistant to cuts, and of average height and reach for a lightweight. But with conditioning, physical strength, a fine right jab and well developed sense of rhythm, he made himself into a credible champion.

Joey Archer went a long way with little more than great movement and a terrific jab.

 

It's been argued that being gifted with first rate reflexes are necessary to typically carry off his cross armed defense successfully. Not sure I'd use him as a textbook example.

I wonder about Griffith and Clancy. Emile was developed from the ground up, starting with an emphasis on things like movement. He appears to have been a perfect pupil. A naturally impressive physique is what originally attracted attention for him, rather than any display of athletic ability.

 

Anyone feeling Luis Rodriguez? Admittedly i haven't seen extensive footage, but he seems a great example of lateral movment, jabbing, one-two combos, and can fight inside. I think people need to not overlook the ability to be technical inside, not just as a pure boxer. Going inaide is a fundamental for a complete technician, and that seems to be what this thread is about.

 

Michael?

That's not me disagreeing, just not sure who you mean.