You would really have to be trained by them personally to know for sure. It would come down to individual preference I guess as well. Both are clearly very good though.
I would say McCracken not just because of AJ but his work with froch too. Booth seems to train lots of people but look at the ones he has lost. BJS did about a week, haye, eubank Jr (although he would leave anyone) and good old danny Williams. His current crop, lots relies on PBK who does look a great talent, Burnett, Andy Lee and charlie Edwards to name a few... I think that booth can take a fighter to a certain level, but for ultimate elite level you got to say McCracken
Hard one to say but both seem genuine world class. They run different set ups, McCracken concentrates solely on one pro fighter at a time were as Booth has a camp of fighters. Some fighters prefer individual work and some prefer working alongside other fighters. I would say if your working with just the one fighter it must be easier to improve thst fighter as you can give them total more education. Most trainers need a team of fighters to try make a living but you only need one fighter if your with AJ especially if your on 10%.
Mc Cracken Booth is very scientific in his approach but Mc Cracken can gets that back up from the experts anyway when he needs it and he has the experience and has been in the trenches . Booth has not I always keep an eye on Mark Tibbs I like him as a trainer and would like to see him bring on a couple of world champions
One swallow doesn't make a summer bd. One fighter ..bjs....and BJS has had one great performance with him.ONE.
What ingle provides is a fantastic conditioning regime. BJS lacked stamina and conditioning. Ingle has sorted that out, BJS will not have taken anything from ingle in terms of technical ability and has excelled because he now matches his talent with a great engine. Also Kell brook, great stamina but questionable when placing him with elite... For that reason I don't think ingle is in same league as McCracken or booth
I go booth. Both got different strengths. Personally think booth even tho mckrackens had the marginally better fighters. Mckracken great at getting respect getting them working hard etc...but froch and Joshua make far more mistakes than haye and groves under booth for me. Froch took so many shots in his career. Joshua still makes basic mistakes. Booth tried to reinvent the wheel a little bit...a bit like ingle. They,ve brought their own ideas to boxing whereas mckracken kind of trys to perfect the basics. Its basic boxing his real strength is getting work out of them and getting that respect you need as a coach. Whereas booths style is great for me. Its also a bit of a nightmare proposition to fight against cause it makes the opponents hesitant to throw. The position you want your opponent in. Both great at what they do. If I was a young guy coming through I,d be more tempted to go with booth tho. I think he could improve you more than mckracken overall. Joshua just a bit of a freak of nature...and frochs chin got him out of trouble. Other guys without them attributes would,t get so far under mckracken tho.
Both are good but I'd say mccracken, he is always calm when training fighters, never getting carried away and giving off the impression that this is our job this is just what we do it comes natural and his knowledge is very good
Adam or Tony? And while you're it, whom surnamed McCracken did you mean? Helpful to use full names innit.