Of the really superb technicians I've seen most have had quite a lot of success. Off the top of my head they would be H. Johnson, Duran, McCallum, Kalambay, Hopkins and Mayweather. They all reached a measure of greatness. Perhaps Kalambay could/should have achieved more. Which are the great technicians that fell short of expectations? Curry?
Of course its a very big part in a boxers make up, i certainly think so, but without heart and character it will only take you so far. Heart and character sorts out the good from the great
Ask Mayorga how far a great chin can take you. Ask Corrales how far heart can take you. Any one or two aspects in boxing can only take you so far. Skill, technique, timing, it's all the same. It's about who can put it all together the best. BTW, Kayode is garbage.
I think Barrera-Hamed is an excellent illustration of the importance of technique. The best example of a technically flawed natural being schooled by a master craftsman that I can think of.
You guys have made excellent points. Powerpuncher, do you know the fight Im speaking of? Kayode may not have great technique, but couldnt you tell the clear distinction between the sharpness and finesse in his movements compared to the older guy? The other guy fought more sloppy, in the sense that he didnt look that good, but he was far more effective A bit of an overstatment, but I meant in comparisons to timing, and distance judgement, technique and skill are not as important as people make it out to be. I just think people are looking for the wrong things, when comparing fighters of new and old. Thats the nature of my intention of making this thread. Its that people are placing way too high importance things like punch guard styles and stances. Isnt that the #1 answer why people say pre-20's fighters wouldnt stand a chance with the best today?
Again I have to refer to Hamed-Barrera. Hamed has great distance judgement, timing and reflexes to go with scary power, but his **** stance, low guard, crap upper-body movement, poor footwork and exposed chin is enough for the physically inferior Barrera to beat him up. A couple of things can be noted: 1. Hamed's "fencer" stance makes his jab more of a poke, and his exposed chin and low shoulder means that Barerra easily outjabs him, even though jabs shouldn't play such a big part in a southpaw/orthodox match-up. His stance also means that his left has a long way to travel, and even though it should be his greatest weapon becausse of the southpaw/orthodox match-up it's therefore rendered more or less useless. 2. Since Hamed is so exposed when punching he gets countered and can't put any combinations together. He's reduced to "hail mary's" more or less. 3. His lacking technical defence and footwork causes him to be off balance when backing off from Barreras attacks and therefore unable to counter. In summation: He's outjabbed, can't use his straight left effectively, can't attack effectively without being countered and can't counter effectively when he's attacked. And all this because of the huge flaws in his stance, footwork and guard. If these were at the same level as Barrera's, Barrera would have done well to last the distance. Technique makes all the difference in the fight.
I don't understand this distinction between timing, judging distance, and then "skill" and "technique." MMA fighters have **** timing and ability (For lack of a better word) to judge distance... because they don't have those skills. What you take as a natural ability or technique that doesn't matter is skilled acquired through experience. Regardless of how fat or bad some fighter may look. They're still most likely not some random fat guy walking off the street.
I think your dissecting the term 'technique' too deep You know the term timing beats speed? Thats what I mean But nice example and explanation Bojak