how come movers are almost considered techical fighters? while pressure fighters

you can be technical and offensive.... pac's a good example of this, so is sal sanchez, mike tyson, DLH at times, and the ultimate example of this: Duran

 

Cotto is a great technical come forward fighter.

 

Gets hit too easily.

 

Tyson, Foreman, Holyfeild, Hagler, Frazier, etc etc... Were African American fighters and they were not consider technical.

 

He had a decent enough defense to become top 10 P4P. It's underrated IMO.

 

That's 'cos Joe did his job well enough. :verysad Truth be told, Ali had a very under-rated chin; he was too tough for his own good. Most of the left hooks that were thrown at him by Frazier would've put most of the division into comas.

Lights Out in his prime was a joy to watch:good He made you pay for any whiff you made - didn't have to back off, didn't have to reset.

So true, so cruel.

I dunno...Tyson had some pretty wicked skills at dodging shots and firing back - just watch his fight against Michael Johnson (albeit not an elite-level opponent) where he bobs beautifully to avoid the hooks and return fire with a body shot that crumples Johnson. Johnson gamely gets up and has a Tyson Right Missile launched at his head, makes me wince remembering how his afro flung around violently. And that look on his face!

I dunno what technical even means but if you boil it down to hit and not get hit or counter-punching ability, I would like to put up one of my favourites, Orlando Canizales. The guy used angles, elbow-blocked, batted away punches, bobbed & weaved and threw combinations that seemed to have perfect placement! (IMHO). Oh, you might want to turn down/off the volume:

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Upua67GMPSY[/ame]

 

good point there is a science to both but the runner technician may look more polished than the guy pressing the fight and taking chances but both are a science the the pressure fighter has the harder job than the runner IMO

 

Hagler was a very skilled technical fighter.

He may have not been considered that way, but that's just because a lot of people don't watch his fights. They see the Hearns fight and conclude that was how he always fought, when in reality, that was a brilliant out-of-character performance from Marvin.

 

Who the hell ever said Tyson or Holyfield aren't technical? Nobody. Quit trying to argue with strawmen.

 

but he is great at it! Used to be at least, until after he hired Steward...I see him goin forward still but not like he used to.

He is a top 20 in the world and I think his style fits perfect into the thread topic.

 

as barry shows here.

always method behind the madness. :yep

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5-o5SPfti1A[/ame]

:bbb

 

Yeah, I noticed this while re-watching the Oscar/Vargas fight. Vargas was a very technically sound boxer who happened to be aggressive and Lampley kept saying how Oscar wanted to box and Vargas brawl. The idea that if you come forward you have no technique is really prevalent now.