This is not a rhetorical question. Because Margarito, while lacking in refinement, had very solid fundamentals. Ali, on the other hand, was brilliant in many ways but was lacking in terms of fundamentals. So which was the more skilled fighter - the very solid but uninspired Margarito or the brilliant but flawed Ali?
Ali's "fundamentals" were fine. Jab, right hand, good balance, tight stance, very correct in most everything he did. He disregarded body punching and inside fighting almost totally, and had some very unorthodox head movements but that worked for him with his speed and size.
And he always kept his right hand low, which is why he was caught with so many left hooks. Margaritos fundamentals were decent, but the guy was flat footed, used no lateral body movement, and basically used his chin as a form of defence.
Well, I kind of agree with both of you. But use, say, Nunn or RJJ if you think those are better examples. What I'm getting at is what constitutes skill. I don't have a definite answer myself.
Margarito had pretty mediocre fundamentals imo.I'd definitely consider Ali the more skilled fighter. I'd probably use someone like Michael Watson, Alberto Davila, Ayub Kalule in this kind of comparison ie guys with very sound fundamentals and even a gifted application of them, but lacking in various athletic\physical areas that stops them from beating the very best of their day.Maybe those guys are too skilled for what you are looking for though. ultimately i consider there to be more than one type of easily defined "skillset" in boxing.Broadly speaking you've got..textbook\ fundamental oriented stuff, this is what we all usually refer to as skills without much argument i'd say...more purely athletic\physical stuff that ties into how well you can excecute the basic offensive\defensive moves and how far you can deviate from them...and a harder to define certain natural fighting effectiveness, which might be mostly mental, and\or can be the tough to articulate reason why two fighters with similar styles and physical attribtes can have significantly different success levels with it. Probably more and they all feed off each other.
Pretty good distinction, I'd say. I also like a definition McGrain made years ago - something along the lines that there are the taught skills, the textbook skills of course falls into this category, and the you have the learned skills. And these are more closely tied to the fighter's specific characteristics and abilities.
Margarito could adeptly cut off the ring and had a wide punch selection. His left body rip was a great punch. However, his sets ups late in his career were not based off the jab where he sloppily walked in. If you watch early his career he had some footwork and used a rhythm to throw a gazillion punches from the outside (many arm punches though). His defense was never based around parries or head movement. Offensively he was very skilled but thats it. If we are talking about great pressure fighters and how Margarito skillset fits in, I dont think he is even a top 10-15. Ali had great ring generalship along with all the other tools mentioned in this thread. The fight was usually on his terms, Margarito really had to force it and had to make the best of when and if he could get inside. Pressure fighters can still control the ring Margarito didnt. Great finely skilled pressure fighters like JCC or Qawi at 175 did so without taking copious damage and were in control even if not on the inside. Margarito couldn't do this. He always had to be ON and frantic in his wide windmill style, if he wasn't backing a guy up he wasn't do anything.
Skill is just being able to do what you intend to do. And preventing the other guy doing what he wants to do.
