its a shame he couldnt capitalise against fighters like arguello, Chacon and edwards who were far from technically sound
True. Textbook is always the first thing that springs to mind when talking about technically great fighters for me aswell to be fair. In terms of pure textbook fighters, hard to me to look past the likes of Harold Johnson and Bernard Hopkins.
I can see your point. :good Its really in no particular order, but yeah those came to mind right away.
+1 for Winky. His fight with Trinidad was a thing of beauty and still one of my favorite fights. Wlad is another one.
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lnkwCM5_TjY[/ame] Like most of the fighters here, had areas where he get less than textbook and occasional flaws(mainly that he didn't always turn his straight puncher over all the way), as well as not being a top physical talent overall, but as far as the skillset he had mastered and had to draw from in fights, he was very complete from both a textbook and technical perspective.
It's pretty hard to rate Jones technically because there is no way you can fault him. Pretty much everything he did, was as close to perfection as you'll find in any history book. The thing is though, he's so far away from what is supposed to be good technical ability, how do you fairly rate him? He did everything right or nothing right, depending on how you look at it. Don Curry was a good call.
good analysis on jones. textbook no, but what he did do was as close to perfect as posssible as for wlad, think he's a great choice:thumbsup