Jack Sharkey is one of the most technicaly complete of all the heavyweight champions

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by janitor, Jun 8, 2008.


Page 1 of 4
  1. janitor

    janitor VIP Member Full Member

    71,528
    27,117
    Feb 15, 2006
    I genuinely think that he might have been a bigger wasted talent than Max Baer.

    The douchebag could do everything. He could box, punch, fight inside outside and in between. He could fight in a number of styles and do all of them well.

    He didnt have any technical weakneses on paper.

    Muldoon described him as the best fighter in the world from the neck down and that is a fair summary.

    If his head had been screwed on the world would have trembled.
     
    janitor, Jun 8, 2008
    janitor, Jun 8, 2008
    #1
  2. Seamus

    Seamus Proud Kulak Full Member

    61,145
    45,433
    Feb 11, 2005
    I've always thought the same. He could display excellent technical and physical abilities and then just crumble mentally. I would be interested in hearing more anecdotes about him.
     
    Seamus, Jun 8, 2008
    Seamus, Jun 8, 2008
    #2
  3. Russell

    Russell Loyal Member Full Member

    43,650
    13,046
    Apr 1, 2007
    What were his mental hang ups anyway, exactly?
     
    Russell, Jun 8, 2008
    Russell, Jun 8, 2008
    #3
  4. McGrain

    McGrain Diamond Dog Staff Member

    112,819
    47,709
    Mar 21, 2007
    I agree that he is feircely underated as a pure talent.

    I think that Liston was more technically complete. Tunney was technically better too.
     
    McGrain, Jun 8, 2008
    McGrain, Jun 8, 2008
    #4
  5. SuzieQ49

    SuzieQ49 The Manager Full Member

    37,077
    3,725
    Sep 14, 2005

    Tunney better technically too? you mean the way he kept his hands by his waist. Is that what they teach you in your boxing gym you go too for "technical skills"??? just curious cause as an amatuer boxer myself I am taught to keep my hands up by my chin, protect yourself at all times. Tunney is off the charts with his ring intelligence, and throws very straight punches with authority, and his footwork is very developed, but I cant get over someone who holds there hands low and leans back while keeping your gaurd low.


    As for Sharkey, I agree with everything you say Ben, but heres what kept sharkey back. He was GOOD at everything, but never great at one particular thing.
     
    SuzieQ49, Jun 8, 2008
    SuzieQ49, Jun 8, 2008
    #5
  6. McGrain

    McGrain Diamond Dog Staff Member

    112,819
    47,709
    Mar 21, 2007
    In fact I meant his near perfect punching form and world class footwork, but if you like, yes, his hand-position, which was considered absolutley correct for his time in a technical sense.
     
    McGrain, Jun 9, 2008
    McGrain, Jun 9, 2008
    #6
  7. McGrain

    McGrain Diamond Dog Staff Member

    112,819
    47,709
    Mar 21, 2007
    It's funny, great fighers from the HW division tend to show something of a derth of technical excellence in a division where it possibly costs them more dearly to be sloppy than any other. Think of Lewis stumbling off the ropes v Rahman, hands down, face forward, smiling, before he was stopped by that magical right hand.

    Identifying technical excellence in this division is not as easy as it is in the top of the MW division (Where Monzon and Hopkins show absolutley world class technical attributes, Hagler isn't that far behind and Robinson, though more rogue technically, has some of the best footwork and technical punching anywhere in boxing) or the WW division for example...why no great HW technicians?

    There's Louis, of course.
     
    McGrain, Jun 9, 2008
    McGrain, Jun 9, 2008
    #7
    cross_trainer likes this.
  8. Bokaj

    Bokaj Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    28,079
    12,994
    Jan 4, 2008
    Very good point. Having 200+ lbs of muscle in front of you that can take you out with one punch should be as good incentive as any too keep your hands up and not be sloppy.

    Except Louis I would name Patterson and Tyson as well drilled boxers. Holyfield was also technically sound, but less tactically so, since he had a penchant to brawl with fighters much bigger and stronger than himself. Norton, in his own awkward way, was pretty technically sound.
     
    Bokaj, Jun 9, 2008
    Bokaj, Jun 9, 2008
    #8
  9. McGrain

    McGrain Diamond Dog Staff Member

    112,819
    47,709
    Mar 21, 2007
    Do you think this situation has come about on account of there is a greater emphasis on strength, punch resistance and power in this division? Or do you think it is just considerably more difficult to use proper technique consistantly when you are that big? The division will probably never produce a Juan Manueal Marquez or a Ricardo Lopez or a Bernard Hopkins type ATG...

    Tyson is a great subject to discuss in terms of technical ability. On the one hand he has excellent movement and footwork and hand positioning - on the other hand he can be very sloppy with punching. I think it perhaps depended upon who he had in front of him, and, of course, his state of mind.

    But I agree he is a better technical boxer than the majority of the great HW champs.
     
    McGrain, Jun 9, 2008
    McGrain, Jun 9, 2008
    #9
  10. Mendoza

    Mendoza Hrgovic = Next Heavyweight champion of the world. banned Full Member

    55,255
    10,344
    Jun 29, 2007
    Some of the hardest guys to hit had low guards, SuzieQ. Corbett, Tunney, and Ali come to mind. Quick feet, lateral agility, quick minds, and quick intercepting hands make them hard to hit from the outside.

    Unlike Ali and Corbett, Tunney was a pretty good in-fighter.

    As for Jack Sharkey, he has some technical brilliance in this offensive technique. It is written that boxing has eight basic punches, four for the right, and four for the left, and Sharkey could throw them all well.
     
    Mendoza, Jun 9, 2008
    Mendoza, Jun 9, 2008
    #10
  11. mcvey

    mcvey VIP Member Full Member

    97,685
    29,007
    Jun 2, 2006
    Sharkey possibly lacked top power ,though his list of kos is misleading.As for carrying your hands low other fighters that did would include Jack Johnson,Jimmy Slattery,Muhammad Ali ,they didnt do too bad.Tunney couldnt have been all that easy to tag as he was only down once .Floyd Patterson kept his hands up at all times ,he was down 20 times,and before you say most of Tunneys opponents were Lhs ,so was he at the time so that evens out.
     
    mcvey, Jun 9, 2008
    mcvey, Jun 9, 2008
    #11
  12. McGrain

    McGrain Diamond Dog Staff Member

    112,819
    47,709
    Mar 21, 2007
    This is very true, but in fairness to Q, it doesn't represent technical excellence.

    Roy Jones was another one who had wandering hands but was very hard to hit, and near impossible to hit clean.
     
    McGrain, Jun 9, 2008
    McGrain, Jun 9, 2008
    #12
  13. Senya13

    Senya13 Boxing Junkie Full Member

    12,966
    2,410
    Jul 11, 2005
    Jones put his hands up when he was within range where he could be hit, lowering his hands only at long range where reflexes and footwork work better than high guard (blocking the view and making it harder to throw a counter).
     
    Senya13, Jun 9, 2008
    Senya13, Jun 9, 2008
    #13
  14. dmt

    dmt Hardest hitting hw ever Full Member

    11,183
    16,727
    Jul 2, 2006
    Yes but Tunney was not as fast as Jones
     
    dmt, Jun 9, 2008
    dmt, Jun 9, 2008
    #14
  15. McGrain

    McGrain Diamond Dog Staff Member

    112,819
    47,709
    Mar 21, 2007
    Not always, but it's true what you say. However, even the oldest of old timers would lift their guards when they thought they were going to get punched in the face.
     
    McGrain, Jun 9, 2008
    McGrain, Jun 9, 2008
    #15
Page 1 of 4