Does 'Textbook boxing' limit creativity and can only take a fighter so far?

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by GPater11093, Nov 9, 2010.



  1. Bujia

    Bujia Well-Known Member Full Member

    1,564
    2,372
    Jul 2, 2020
    Man, I really knew my **** back then.
     
  2. Pat M

    Pat M Active Member Full Member

    1,424
    3,313
    Jun 20, 2017
    Since you mentioned SRL, I thought of the Fight of the Week this week of SRL - Hearns 2. I remember watching the fight and thinking that both were almost perfect fundamentally, which IMO makes them "textbook." Their foot movement, balance, punches...were almost perfect. To me, textbook means correct movement, elbows in, good weight shifts, etc. A fighter can fight any "style" he wants, but if he does the fundamentals right, he is "textbook" IMO.

    Ali, SRL, Holyfield, Tyson, Frazier, Roberto Duran, Hagler, Mike McCallum and many more had excellent fundamentals, but they had different styles. Having great fundamentals didn't limit their "creativity", it just made them able to do things in the ring while maintaining their balance and offensive and defensive capabilities.
     
  3. Bokaj

    Bokaj Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    26,188
    9,762
    Jan 4, 2008
    Yeah, I don't think there's a trade-off between good fundamentals and creativity. Look at Loma, for example. Hardly ever puts a foot, or fist, wrong but has expanded on the traditional textbook with his own moves.

    A musician that knows the scales in his sleep can still improvise. When Hemingway omitted commas at certain places it wasn't because he didn't know his grammar, quite the opposite. I think the principle is the same for boxing.
     
  4. RealDeal

    RealDeal Pugilist Specialist Full Member

    1,539
    1,556
    May 2, 2009
    A guy like Mikey Garcia has very good technical skills. But like Mayweather said, he’s straight up and down, no special effects.
     
    robert ungurean likes this.
  5. Rafaman

    Rafaman Active Member Full Member

    1,009
    428
    Jun 26, 2015
    Being special doesn't make you great, the greats make it look special.
     
  6. Rafaman

    Rafaman Active Member Full Member

    1,009
    428
    Jun 26, 2015
    At 126 or 130 he was very special. The power alone in his straight right, that is a very rare quality. Watch him train back then, its like a gun going off with the right hand. Crazy power. He just hides it behind a conservative style.

    With the added weight and height/reach disadvantages at 140 and above he looked dulled.
     
    Bokaj likes this.
  7. Seamus

    Seamus Proud Kulak Full Member

    53,670
    32,417
    Feb 11, 2005
    This is a top-rate thread.

    There are certainly technical pitfalls you don't want a fighter to exhibit. However, dynamic fighters can trump textbook fighters by having an overwhelming advantage in one department that the technically adept guy can not avoid. The guy who most often wins is the one who sets the rules for how the match will be fought.
     
    reznick, Gazelle Punch and Bokaj like this.
  8. Cobra33

    Cobra33 Boxing Junkie Full Member

    9,438
    7,943
    Feb 2, 2006
    You know what a great thread.
    I think it depends on the boxer.
    You can be text book correct but employ it how it works for you.
    Roy Jones wasn't textbook but he didn't have to be bit I'm pretty sure he could be if he HAD to be.
    Harold Johnson was a beautiful boxer who was textbook and It worked great for him and he never strayed from it.
    Toney to an extent was textbook but in a different way.
     
  9. Richard M Murrieta

    Richard M Murrieta Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    20,763
    27,335
    Jul 16, 2019
    Textbook can take you so far, you have to know how to make adjustments on your own in a fight, based on your experience. You cannot be co dependent on a trainer or corner, they are not in the ring with you. It helps, but can be a hinderance too, as trainers are human, and prone to make mistakes, also. I do not buy the co dependence theory, that a fighter lost because of a change in the corner, sounds more like a ready made excuse. Either a fighter has it or he does not, nor does he have the heart or desire when the chips are down.
     
    Flo_Raiden likes this.
  10. roughdiamond

    roughdiamond Ridin' the rails... Full Member

    9,600
    17,681
    Jul 25, 2015
    Bump. For this type of example, I think timing and ring awareness are particularly important moreso than an attribute like speed. Chavez Sr. used to double his right frequently and I wouldn't class him as a particularly 'fast' fighter, but his awareness made him both effective with it and hard to return fire to.
     
  11. Gazelle Punch

    Gazelle Punch Boxing Addict Full Member

    6,112
    7,532
    Aug 15, 2018
    I’ve always been of the opinion you should build a fighter around their strengths. Three men all weighing 200 pounds but wjth heights of 5”10 6”2 and 6”6 should not be fighting by the book with the same style. Unique wins but like others said here the most important things with the basics are controlling pace, spacing, and neutralizing the other guys strengths. After that there’s many ways to apply offense and defense for different heivbts
     
  12. Flash24

    Flash24 Boxing Addict Full Member

    5,675
    7,680
    Oct 22, 2015
    Textbook is great as a simple learning tool. But physicality is just as important, if not more so. Would fighters like Foreman, Frazier, Ali, Whitaker, Robinson, Jones Jr. , Benitez, Duran, Marciano, Foster, Leonard and many many others have the success they had if they fought "Textbook".