extraordinary offence vs extraordinary defence

Extraordinary offence vs extraordinary defense = Extraordinary defense health come first...true story no joke.

 

...of Floyd vs GGG :think

 

you need to go to a boxing gym and learn a little something about the sport you pretend to watch

 

I favour defensive fighters, but that's mainly because I just like watching that style.

That being said, the guy that most people call the greatest boxer of all time (Robinson) was apparently more of an offensive type of fighter.

 

Kinda . . . but Toney was not at his peak. Toney was probably the only fighter in Jones' era that could have beat RJJ . . . to bad he did not come close to having the dedication of Bhop.

The Best example is JCC V Pernell . . . both slightly past their best but still better than the rest

 

Actually, like most greats SRR's offense flowed from his defense. you really cannot dissect the two when you are talking about ATG fighters

 

Often great defensive fighters are very accurate scorers with their return shots. Which to me makes them good offensive fighters as well, but in a different sense obviously as they tend to lead off the backfoot and not put opponents under pressure. Great examples being Willie Pep, Mayweather, Whittaker etc. However style wise if these guys get matched against a negative fighter then you could be in for a rather dull contest. I fighter I love is a prime Roberto Duran, always offensive and putting opponents under pressure yet had great defensive skills which were overlooked by many due to the sheer velocity of his attack.

 

JCC wasn't no where near his peak either. he never did well at WW while Pernell did have some success at WW and was better suited at the weight.

also, JCC v pernell was closer than toney v rjj which i think is the best example of offense vs defense.

 

It depends on the ring size. You make it as big as a football field, someone runs to victory. You make the ring smaller, then we'll see what happens.