Most technically skilled heavyweight champion vote?

You shouldn't pick one or two fights where he struggled, any greats have a few of those.
You know what, if you gonna say Ali or Holmes have more technical skills than Louis. You won't have much argument from me. They are arguably top 3 heavies.
Read the post above this, my opinion is well shared.

 

Don't bother mate, he's a cretin. While I do believe Ali would beat Louis head-to-head, there's no doubt Louis is more technically skilled. Seems like a LOT of people have misread the thread, and are talking about stuff like grit, mental strength, etc which has absolutely nothing to do with what technical skills.

 

I didn't read some of his post above. I just realised now I have been debating with somebody who thinks fury is the GOAT.
Thanks for the heads up and saving my time and energy.

 

For me it would be Ali than the great Ezzard Charles (incredible LHW as well,) and than Joe Louis.

Ali wasn't the biggest guy and definitely didn't carry that 1 punch KO power that some of his contemporaries at the time had (Frazier, Foreman, Shavers.) He had to use his technical ability and ring generalship to win most of his fights in the 70's.

Back in the mid 60's before the whole military draft issue (around the time he took on Cleveland,) that version of him was arguably the most technically skilled HW ever.

 

This is just so true

 

Some of you are comparing Skills with Talents. Not the same thing.

Talents: Height, Reach, Weight, Reactiontime, Handeye-coordination, Explosiveness, Stamina, chin, etc...

Skills: techniques. But skills won't work against a very talented fighter. Like if you're the smaller guy with slow reactions, while your opponent has the faster hands, and feet. What can you do about the jab then?

- Nothing.

Even if your blocking techniques are vastly superior and more proper on video analysis.

Ali was really talented for his era but not very skilled compared to some others.

If you cant pull the trigger, or catch the punches coming in, techniques means nothing.

 

Holmes sprang to mind. Wasn't Patterson also known as an excellent technician?

 

Height, Reach and Weight are attributes , not talents.

Skills can over come physical attributes , or else Mike Tyson would never have became undisputed Champion and would lose to Valeuv.

 

Fury IS the GOAT

Anyone who thinks otherwise dosen't know boxing

 

Since there's no Larry Holmes on that list, voted for Holyfield.

Holy had great skills, had every punch in his arsenal, great left hook, double left hook, right hook, straight and uppercut, pretty good jab.

Excellent combination puncher with great counterpunching skills.

Now I'm not talking about dirty tricks, where Holy was master, too.

Joe Louis is equally good in terms of skills and hit harder than Holy.

Tyson was pretty skilled, Ali too.

 

Holyfield could fight small and Fall guys, had every Punch in the book and was a great fighter. Just fundamentales wlad is Up there. Perfect right Hand, perfect short and Long left hook and perfect jab

 

They are all talents. things you cant change.

And Tyson was also talented. Explosiveness. Power. Chin. Reaction time. All put together with great techniques aswell. Check the video.

 

A talent is same as skill. Something you CAN change. You can become more talented at various different disciplines.

Being tall is not a talent. Mariz Wach is tall. He has no talent. His height is an attributes , nothing more , nothing less.

 

Wlad has good fundamentals but he can't put them together unlike other great tacticians. He pawed and cliched excessively to compensate an incomplete skill -set.
He jab was far from perfect and nowhere near the level of a Holmes jab or a Lewis jab. In fact Buster Douglas had a much better jab than Wlad.
What good jabber did Wlad ever out jab? None.

 

Pulev might have the best jab in the division right now.