So you agree with him that Taylor isnt one of Scotlands greatest ever fighters? Whats amazing about what he's saying?
I'm open minded mate. As you can see from my first response in the thread I put Taylor up there, but the level of knowledge, detail, and conceptual reasoning in his posts is excellent and it made me think twice. He's not saying Taylor isn't a very good boxer. Twas a privilege to read his posts as I'm sure you'll agree you don't come across knowledge like that every day.
What knowledge is that? Theres nothing he's said that everyone doesn't know already. He's brought up a bunch of Scottish fighters from the distant past who never reached the top but were respectable fighters. I don't dispute that some of these guys might have been really good fighters that may have been world champions if they fought in todays era but thats all conjecture. Taylor didn't just pick up one world championship belt. He picked up four belts fighting guys who were top fighters from all around the world. Theres no point in learning about Scotlands boxing history if it warps your brain to the point you think that Taylor doesn't compare to some guy from the 30s who lost 39 fights and never won a world title and spent his career fighting local and regional fighters. It's just silly. The sport has moved on. Comparing fighters from the 30s to guys today is hard and probably not worth it. For me a list of greatest Scottish fighters should mostly be post war because it's hard to judge what boxing was like in the 20s or 30s as none of us actually lived through that era. It's like comparing footballers from the 20s and 30s with players today.
just because you don’t know x and y doesn’t mean he doesn’t. He’s obviously a boxing historian who knows the sport like the back of his hand. Instead of insulting him by calling him daft you could try to process the information and you might learn a thing or two.
What he is saying is daft. It's the only nice way of putting it. Theres nothing he has said that I didn't know already and most of it is irrelevant to what we are discussing anyways.
Mad. Seemed to go from a spiteful, fast, great fighter to shadow very quickly. I thought he’d beat Caterall in a wide ud. Not taking anything away from Caterall’s first win as he was absolutely superb that night. For some reason I always thought Taylor would end up getting some good wins again. Anyway, I really liked watching him. Favourite memory was him wiping the floor with cocky Ohara Davies who was seen as a big deal then.
Taylor was a high energy fighter who was great on the inside. McGuigan suited him perfectly. Davison tried to change his style but Taylor still had enough of McGuigan left in him to beat Ramirez. If you watch the fight back he tried to fight on the backfoot for the first 4 rounds (as per Davison’s instructions) but then just reverted to type and got stuck in and won. McNally was a really poor fit. Taylor’s weakness was always his lack of head movement but for some reason McNally had him fighting at range. Against counter punchers in Lopez and Catterall it meant he could be picked off fairly easily on the way in. Had a bit of bad luck after the Ramirez fight with injuries but also seemed to lose motivation and hunger. He had 2 nightmare camps for the first Catterall fight and the Lopez fight. Fighting Lopez just months after doing his plantar fascia was lunacy.