Fast vs. Athletic.

You have a number of things.

Timing.
Hand-eye.
Twitch muscle fibers.
Reaction Time.
Distance control.
Technique.

All counts for speed. But only Twitch muscle fibers for explosiveness.

 

I'd say athletic and fast probably go hand in hand to be honest

If a guy is one he's most likely the other

 

What about things like strength, power, stamina? Isn't that athletic? I don't agree only speed is it.

 

In another thread "yeah there's a difference between the 2."

In this thread..."uh what's the difference between the 2?"

Lol

 

Being fast is just one element of being an overall great athlete.

Being a great well rounded athlete involves:

This content is protected

This content is protected

(one can be strong without having that much power).

This content is protected

(a very valuable and important part of athleticism - compare the brilliant and natural body control and balance of Roger Federer to Grigor Dimitrov, who whilst quick and fast is on skates half the time in his tennis matches).

This content is protected

This content is protected

(strategically, tactically, and relates to one's potential for understanding things like distance control).

This content is protected

And after those bases are covered, one works on the SKILLS of the game.

 

Khan is fast, but is not athletic... ironically.

 

I'm not a Khan fan but you dont think hes athletic?

 

Not necessarily. While a guy like young Jones Jr., or Mayweather was both, Look at a guy like Ike Quartey. That jab was lightning quick and powerful. But Quartey didn't seem very athletic. He seemed somewhat flat footed and stiff, jabbing behind that guard.

 

Malignaggi = fast
Terry Norris, Orlando Canizales, Roy Jones Jr, Floyd Mayweather = athletic

Athletic fighters usually make some highlight reels of their careers look SO easy, but for most to be able to duplicate the same feats, it's anything BUT. Athletic fighters usually cover many areas, usually they are highly skilled and when they're not, may depend mostly on their reflexes and power.

 

No. There's something strangely plodding about his movement. Khan has the speed but he's awkward, can't seem to move very well like he's uncoordinated. Athletic to me would be Loma, Pac, FLoyd, Jones Jr. amongst others.

 

Athletic is speed agility and stamina. Anything like balance and hand co ordination is more for the technical side. I'd put power in the strength category.

 

I disagree. Balance is something some people just have and other's don't. One could easily argue that power in boxing is more on the technical side and how you punch, but as a raw component of athleticism, strength doesn't = power. There are extremely strong guys who can't punch hard because they might be strong but slow. Typically, being fast (lots of fast twitch) + being strong does tend to equate to very good power, but flexibility is important here, as well as one's levers. A tight body won't punch as hard as a free body, typically speaking.

Hand-eye coordination is a key part of any world class athlete and some are simply blessed the that ability as a core part of their make-up. Sure, all these attributes can be bolstered through training. Speed and endurance can be improved through training just as can hand-eye coord., but there are limits. Some "athletes" will never be balanced or have truly impressive hand-eye coord. no matter how hard they try. They are things that are largely genetic, in my view. Some athletes just have a highly unusual and thorough understanding of their positioning in context with their surrounding and circumstance in the sporting sense.

 

Proper techniques would add speed to the boxer.

 

Speed is just an attribute of athleticism. You can be fast but not athletic. Joe Calzaghe is a prime example of that, very fast hands but not athletic.

An athlete who is athletic has more than speed they have agility, explosiveness, some power, good co-ordination.