Most Fundamentally Sound Boxer?

Hopkins had an excellent straight right lead :huh

The dip of his head was also by design, though not most asthetically pleasing.

 

He's always thrown that lead right without proper balance. But he's such a smart boxer that he knows how to turn that to his advantage. Sort of. The way he throws it not only leaves him exposed, it also means he can't follow up with a left hook.

Had he followed up with a sharp left instead of just stumbling into Calzaghe behind his right that might have been more than just a knock-down.

 

Toney could be ponderous with his footwork and was rather inept at cutting off the ring. He was brilliant at what he did, but lacking in other areas. Hopkins is a good call, though, as he was very good technically at moving and setting up traps while also quite good at pressuring when need be. Technically speaking, Hopkins seemed to have all the bases covered (and his lead right was his finest weapon).

 

No. You're not supposed to step, or often stumble, forward behind it like that. Because if the opponent slips it you'lll be left exposed in the middle of a step, with both feet parallell. It also means you can't follow up with a left hook.

 

The only negatives for a Hopkins right hand that come to mind, is that he would always step in the same direction after throwing (covered by the fact that he had just timed you, and was so selective with the punch.)

Also as he aged, he became overly reliant, and slightly too ponderous.

 

It wasn't fundamentally correct. No more than Nunn or Ali leaning back from punches was. That they often made it work pretty well for them anyhow is another story.

And while it's true that Toney never was good at cutting the ring off, I wouldn't call that fundamentals. For me, fundamentals are the stuff you're taught in the gym from day one, but that takes years and years to master properly. Cutting off the ring isn't something you're usually taught to start with.

 

Yep. And that's not sound fundamentals for throwing a lead right. As you say his timing and selection was of such quality that he almost always got away with it. But it did mean he was unable of following up with a left hook.

 

Best weapon and technically correct aren't the same thing. Floyd Patterson's leaping left hook was his finest weapon, but who in the name of God would teach that move to a beginner just starting out in the sport?

Hopkins knows the inside and outside of most boxing strategy, which is why, although he had fantastic fundamentals, he was also willing top break fundamentals and use weapons and moves that were unorthodox when he felt appropriate.

Take his little "blind you with jab that's just short then follow it up with an uppercut from the other hand that you never see coming because you're still looking at the jab" move. Beautiful move, that he used effectively many times in his career, but it's not exactly orthodox or something that you want to use all the time. You save that for when the time is right and breaking convention works to your benefit.

 

The worst kind of guy to fight, is one with the brain of a textbook and the imagination of a virtuoso.

 

Bokaj is right. Hopkins fighting style became fundamentally ugly.

But he was so effective. He mastered opponents. And could still clearly box beautifully when needed.

What he does to Pavlik is INCREDIBLY high level. Watch his feet.

 

Masterful footwork, correct. It's why I think he beats Toney H2H.

 

Yeah, when i critisise his right lead it shouldn't take away from the many things he does so very, very well. The fights against Tito and Pavlik are such that everyone who likes to box should study.

Ward reminds me quite a bit about Hopkins. He's not as naturally smooth in his movements like PBF or Donaire (just as Hopkins wasn't quite as smooth as Toney and McCallum), but just so effective and calculated in everything he does. Nothing happens by chance for guys like Ward and Hopkins. I like that.

 

It seemed that most often Hopkins would throw the lead right and lunge in a bit with his head low so as to wind up inside. That was the primary use of the right lead for him - using it as a means to transistion to a preferred distance - and he almost always used it perfectly. I'd have to rewatch fights to point out exact examples, but it's not like he always used the punch in that manner. He didn't always step through behind it and I'm damn near positive I've seen him follow up lead rights with left hooks (particularly to the body) before. Hopkins using the punch for a more advanced, more unique kind of purpose doesn't mean he was incapable of throwing it in the textbook fashion.

This is basically my point. Hopkins using a relatively unorthodox technique because he believes it will work better for what he wants doesn't mean he lacks the skill to throw the punch fundamentally sound. He didn't always do so because he was capable of more advanced stuff, but that basic skill is still there for when the other might not work. The difference between this and Ali pulling straight back from punches is that Ali never really showed a terrific, fundamentally sound guard. Again, maybe I'm just remember things wrong , but I'm almost certain that I've seen Hopkins execute the right lead in the most basic of ways from time to time.


Also, I disagree that fundamentals are just what is taught on day one, but that's semantics. A good, complete boxer should know how to effectively pressure an opponent so that he isn't befuddled if the need to do so ever arises, and being able to cut off the ring is an essential aspect of that.

 

You could be right. Hard to say. But I just feel that's something that always been there for him. It was somewhat against Jones, for example, and that's just the guy shouldn't do it against. It wasn't as pronounced as later on, though.

 

Good comparison.