Could someone please define "One-Dimensional" for me?

Alright.. in terms of heart, that performance was highly impressive, but in terms of boxing skill/intelligence, it wasn't.

It'll be impossible to argue with you logically, so I'll just stop now.

 

Sorry I wouldnt say Taylor had no chin. Did you actually watch this fight, it was not a one punch KO Taylor took several shots before going down and took good shots in the rematch without going down.

 

:rofl By your standards, any fighter with impressive heart/toughness is multidimensional.

:rofl :rofl :rofl

 

You picked a bad example with this fight. Kelly said the double jab was getting him tagged in the middle rounds and he stuck with it too long. I think he just had better stamina in the later rounds. Hard to say for sure, since he did hurt Taylor at the end of the 11th, it could have just looked that way and carried over to the 12th.

 

Pavlik and Jack study the films and come up with a plan. If it works, it works. If it works well, then Kelly is one dimensional?

Did you hear Jack tell Kelly against Lockett that things were going just the way they were expected to? They had the right plan.

 

Nevermind..

You need to understand what people mean by multidimensional in BOXING terms before you continue arguing about Pavlik having more than one dimension.

 

Pacquiao is an example of 1-dimensional fighter.

Right Jab,Right Jab,Straight left.... Though the irony is that if you get hit by it your ass is going to kiss the canvass. And at the moment he is considered P4P by the ring magazine.

Someone like Cotto or Hoya are called "multi dimensional fighters". Which can use both hands effectively and throws different combinations.

 

He is a volume, power puncher.

He does not have good defense, does not use angles, does not have good footwork, does not use movement well (head, body or foot), does not fight with a "plan B", etc.

Now you might say..."OH WELL THATS NOT HIS GAME!!!"...and that just PROVES that he is one dimensional. Nothing wrong with it...as people in this post have said, if it aint broke, dont fix it. But please dont try to insinuate that he is a multi-dimensional fighter...because in all honesty, that is laughable.

 

Margo is one dimensional has only one way to fight no plan B. Kelly is somewhat one-dimensional but not nearly as limited as a guy like Margo is.

 

Yes I will explain it in regards to Pavlik...

He fights every fight the same...
He throws the jab and then the right hand, regardless of whether the former lands or not. He still throws his 1-2.
He does not or cannot fight off the back foot. He does not defend or roll with shots, if someone fires back he stands and fires. Nothing wrong with that, but yes it is one dimensional and yes it means he risks being hurt....ie Taylor 1.

What exactly do you want to know or is this just another ass kissing thread? I have explained in some detail his technical flaws and also openly said how much I like to watch him fight and how I like his attitude....

This thread seems a bit false...but if you cannot see how he is one dimensional...I dont know what to say. That said if the one dimension wins you world titles and does the job....who gives a ****?

 

"One dimensional" is just a term some elitists ******* use to try to make a fighter appear hapless. It's overused to the point of being meaningless.

 

Did you just call me an elitist *******....:twisted:







Ummm, yeah I guess it fits....:hey

 

Foreman was one dimensional...but how does that equate into Holyfield and Ali being that? They were the epitome of MULTI-DIMENSIONAL???

atsch

 

If I told you the definition of multi-dimensional, you would proceed to tell me how Pavlik fits that description, so I'd rather not get into all that.

And calling people elitist only because they know their **** and you don't just makes you look dumb and ignorant. Pavlik is one dimensional. It's a fact. Go watch some more fighters other than Pavlik and learn something about boxing.