Heavyweights with the best defence

i think its best to look at a 4-5 year peak period for all fighters and to then look at how well they did the rest of their careers.

I personally think looking at a fighters 4-5 year peak matters more but as a secondary consideration, i also look at the rest of their career.

So for Ali, 64-67, he did not get knocked down, was rarely staggered, and incredibly hard to hit.

The rest of his career? He was only knocked down once from 71-78 while facing a who's who of big punchers like Foreman, Lyle, Frazier, Bonavena, and especially Shavers. Yes, part of his was because he could absorb tremendous punishment. But no one can take clean hits after clean hits and not go down. Ali was able to block most of Foreman's big punches to the face. He was able to take the sting out of a lot of punches and was actually quite good at blocking clean hits to the chin.

Peak Ali from 1964-167: 10/10 on defense despite his technical flaws of holding hands low and leaning away.
Non peak Ali from 1960-63, 1971-78: 7.5/10 on defense.

I personally give more weight to peak.

 

I don't agree that Ali was good defensively. He did everything wrong. He got hit too hard and often later in his career because he ignored the orthodox fundamentals from the start.

 

In his youth , Ali was great defensively DESPITE his style.
His reflexes made up for a poor defense style.

 

Not saying he was the best , but I'll throw in Tony Tubbs ( in his peak years) . He was a master of the ' catch and counter ' style of fighting. Good at making people miss and landing his own in return.
From the same era , Tony Tucker always had a good defense, he comfortably made it the distance with peak Tyson and later , Lennox.
In what could reasonably be called his peak years , nobody took him apart .

 

If he was great defensively, it cannot be a poor defense style, rather an unorthodox defensive style.

Even when his reflexes had gone and he couldn't dance outta the firing line, he still has the experience and fundamentals to turn his head on impact to minimise damage. Slow down the footage and you can see it all there throughout his career.

 

That's a great post mate. I'm stoked to see you posting.

 

Thanks mate - you know me, lurk in the shadows, watching the city, waiting until I feel like it again.

 

Yeah Dinner is doing the same. Well, you post a lot more than him his break was enormous hahaha

 

Very good post.

You can always argue exactly what constitutes good defence, but the one who has impressed me the most as a complete defensive package is Usyk.

 

Pre 1945. He was a journeyman working full time with a family of 6…without money to feed himself or the time to actually train the way a professional should, often taking fights against contenders on 24 hr notice

The rest of his career I think his style wasn’t as appreciated by judges back then who still preferred the bar room brawling gatti-ward style of fighting

Pop his fight against Louis 1947, wayyyy ahead of his time in footwork, head movement, angles, shoulder rolls

 

I looked into it and summarized a while back.

https://www.boxingforum24.com/threads/the-curious-case-of-jersey-joe-walcott-and-his-prime.643117/

 

Being a sucker for a good left hook and jab throughout his career even in his prime is not the sign of a good defensive fighter tbh and it's telling that once his reflexes declined he got hit way more and had to rely on more and more on his chin compared to any other good defensive fighter

 

How did that work for Liston?

Liston had one of the ATG jabs and an excellent left hook.

Having defensive ability doesn't mean that you're not going to get hit at all.

If you only saw Floyd fight Augustus Burton or Castillo the first time around, you wouldn't believe me when I say that he's likely the best defensive master on film.

 

That's why we look at their entire career and over their entire career Floyd has always had great defense Ali has not

 

This isn't the first time I see this claim about the judges not appreciating Walcott's style but upon inspecting Walcott's record against the punchers of his era I don't see the bias. He was always given a lot of rounds and the few decisions he lost, he did so via close split decisions.