The ones you post.I find both very entertaining,regarding the ones you put up here, I completely disregard the agenda that so often accompanies them. ps Best not to confuse technical ability with the ability to read fights and evaluate boxers respective abilities. They are entirely different ,as you have so often proven.
I didn't mention RJJ, Naz, Mayorga or Nunn. I mentioned Carl Froch. If you want me to mention names of members here who state or imply all competent amateiur or pro "modern fighters" have a minimum technical standard that, say. the majority of pre-1950 top fighters didn't posses or even understand in the slightest .... obviously Pat M is the leading light of those. Seamus sometimes, mrkoolkevin to some extent. Although, of course, it's possible I'm wrong and misunderstand them. (and I know a couple of those like to "troll" a bit, and that's fine). I have no idea what said members have to say about RJJ, Naz, Mayorga or Nunn ...... or Froich for that matter.
The simple point is that everyone knows that modern fighters to some degree can get away with breaking fundamentals because there's several of them who has done it. RJJ being the most successful at it and Froch being someone with a good degree of success as well. So there's no debate about that really. The debate is rather whether if it takes some special ability to do it and how far it takes you.
Not sure where I've drawn the line in the past (I'd have to go back and reread some of the language in my posts closely) but it all depends on what exactly you mean by "technique" and who you're comparing him to. If you look at Louis as a power-punching slugger (like I do now), then his technique is generally in line with the way that most guys like that have fought in the past few decades. My issues come from people in forums like this exaggerating his technical prowess while ignoring his limitations. He doesn't particularly stand out to me as a technician, but maybe I use the term improperly? I see technicians as thinking fighters who adapt in the ring and surgically pick people apart. Louis, on the other hand, was more of a come-forward slugger who overwhelmed his overmatched opponents with lethal combinations. I think a lot of classic fans see him as something else just because he threw beautiful punches and moved very deliberately (ie had slow footwork). I still think that Louis would have had a much tougher time against certain types of modern heavyweights. Big guys who can move, work off the jab, and who focus on controlling range could present serious challenges for someone with his style and attributes, even if they aren't ATG immortals like he was.
But all I'm saying is that certain postors on this forum look at old fighters and are quick to declare that they aren't well schooled, "they can't have had good trainers back then" etc., and would not being able cope with any half-decent modern fighter due to the (alleged) fact that they are "not well-schooled" and just about everyone these days allegedly is. All technical deficiences in the majority of old-time contenders are presented as unsurmountable handicaps that would prevent them even achieveing modest success in today's professional or even amateur ranks. Often these judgements are made on very little footage (in fact, in the case of Harry Greb, it's been decded on no fight footage at all). To me it's quite extreme.
If there's no footage at all, yes, one should be very careful. if there's some footage... one can only comment on what's there and be mindful that that's only a part. But there's more than just low or high guard, there's a whole bunch of factors to give the whole picture.
The guy who keeps being brought up concerning "bad fundamentals" is Ricardo Mayorga. In this training video his fundamentals look okay. There is a difference between fundamentals and "style." After a fighter gets his fundamentals down he can fight any style he wants, RJJ, Ali, and many others do things that beginners shouldn't do, but they can because they have mastered the fundamentals and have added some personal touches. Mayorga, in the video doesn't cross his feet, he does nice pivots, gets angles, doesn't throw wide, telegraphed punches, has good balance, etc. Style is individual, fundamentals are the building blocks. If a fighter still crosses his feet when he moves, if he lunges instead of moving his feet, fights with his elbows out like "wings", throws wide, telegraphed punches, etc, he has not mastered the fundamentals, I don't know much about Froch, and I don't know a lot about Mayorga, but from the training video, Mayorga is not a fighter who lacks fundamentals. This content is protected
Thanks for yor input. Like I said, I had no idea what you say about Mayorga. I have no opinion on Mayorga. I can't say much on training footage against someone citing his fights. Lots of fighters get it right in the gym and 'wrong' in the fight. Carl Froch won 10 out of 12 world title fights and has a pretty good resume for his era, and I see him often fighting with his arms out like wings, dropping his shoulder and sticking his chin up, squaring his feet up, and throwing telegraphed punches. But he made it work for him.
How many fighters, modern or from years ago, do we ever see crossing their feet when they move anyway ?
People that think boxing started when Tyson or Mayweather started yes. It’s why I’ve given up talking current scene fighters outside of private groups. They hate the older fighters who they’ve never seen or researched.
