Great fighters who could be frustrating to watch

I think this is an obviosu choice, luckily he is remembered for his fine displays against Liston, Foreman, Frazier etc but many times he laboured his way to victories over lesser oponents. Thats the frustrating thing.

Fighters who fight to the level of the oposition are always frustrating, Eubank was famous for it, would struggle with the likes of Ray Close but go all out against Benn, Rochigianni etc.

Danny Williams is another, every time I see a scheduled fight i pray he has stayed of the pies and done a bit of running and nearly every time im left dissapointed. ok he isnt really a great but still frustrating.

 

i felt nunn coudl punch harder than what people percive...but if he does or not doesnt matter...if your boxing your fightgin in a way to reduce the damage to yourself....staying far away from your opponant is not in any ways boxing. it's so pretencious.

 

True ,but great fighters?

 

But that was when he wasn't really great anymore. Up until 1975 I think he gave good value for the money, with some exceptions. Before the lay-off I think he always looked good.

 

Danny Williams is pretty exciting to watch though. Well, Skelton and Harrison (outside of the rematch) don't really make for great fights, but outside of that he is always entertaining. Big punch, sloppy defence, weak chin but a fighting will like no one else guarantees that.

 

Michael Nunn is the one here for me. The Starling and Barkley fights were awful.

 

Winky. Superb techincal fighter but boring as hell.

 

Sweet Pea, Hopkins, Camacho by far-Macho Man??? Hated his image and personality, if he fought like it in the ring it might have been tolerable.

Old timers- Max Baer-boxed like an amature, didn't train, and his clowning was disrespetful to his opponents, Jack Sharkey (would look great in one fight and complete dog**** the next).

 

But most posters know when a fighter was in his prime. All of Ali's boring performances was when he was past it. Big difference.