Skillsets Are Overated on ESB, While Effectiveness Is Underated... Agree?

somehow, flashiness has been equated with skills and fighters who don't exhibit the 'flash' are wrongly stereotyped as unskilled. fighters like duran and chavez wouldn't be able to compete at the elite level if they aren't skilled. people just don't see the skills because they're subtle. another culprit is that most analysts define skills by equating it with defense. those fighters who are apt to run and move all night are what comes to mind when we hear skills. however, offensive skills are generally underrated. pac and his likes who always get to land the first and the last punches when it comes to exchanges aren't recognized for their skills in throwing punches when offense should really be the epitomy of boxing skills. in judging contests, the first and foremost consideration to get a 10-9 scorecard is to see who landed the most and effective punches. defense and other factors become important only when the offensive rate of two opponents are too close to judge. moreover, a brilliant offense may not even rely on the scorecard to win, as it usually results in a KO. that's why pac or pavlik or cotto may not look flashy and brilliant but they keep on piling wins and KO's because they possess the most important skill there is in boxing and that is offense.

 

This is a new mega brainstorm.

It just doesnt happen here at ESB but everywhere else for that matter.

Also people give far too much attention into someone's impressive amateur background, than a fighter of the same age who has already won a title at the pro level, case in point Povetkin and Sam Peter

 

Couldn't you argue that you can't be effective without some skills. I believe effectivenesss is THE ONLY THING THAT MATTERS!

If you have a shitty skillset but keep beating the skilled fighters......you are better....so you must have some skill. But if you have an abundance of skill but keep losing....can you really be considered skilled? Its a paradox isn't it.

 

agree. a fighter wouldn't pile KOs and victories and get zero or a few losses if he isn't really skilled

 

People equate skill to "textbook" skills. Unorthodox is often overlooked.

 

I think many look down upon ie Kessler for his textbook skills.

 

You know, you're kinda right. But I think it has to do more with him being predictable. DLH has textbook skills, but you didn't know what he was gonna do. Kessler hasn't learned that yet.

 

How many times have we seen idiots bash Pavlik for being one dimensional and an easy beat?

Or bash Calzaghe for being a slapper and an easy beat

Or bash Floyd Mayweather Jr for being a pot shotter and would lose against etc etc etc.

People here like to talk out their arse.

 

Kessler has textbook offense.

Not textbook defense.

Kessler's defense has been distance and the jab, when it's taken away from him, he doesn't move to the side, he doesn't catch punches and mostly he relies on flailing the jab while moving straight back.

 

That's only if we forget the textbook Hook, the textbook combination and the textbook to the body, which Kessler doesn't possess.

 

Pavlik I would say is well skilled, entertaining and the best in his division.

Pac I would say is somewhat skilled, entertaining and the best in his division.

So while Pavlik has a lot of skill such as a good jab, decent defense (well compared to Pac he has great defense actually), Pac does not have much of what you would consider skill. At least not defensive and textbook skill. He has a tremendous lot of power, good chin, tennasity and is fairly fast (althoigh not overly so) but he is not at all technically skilled like your RJJ, Hopkins, Toney, Mosely. Or even your Pavlik.

Pavlik doesn't jump back and forth with his hands down and attack like a kid in his first boxing lesson. He fights fairly diciplined and knows all the basics well. Sure he can still learn, but he is undoubtedly more skilled than Pac.

Should he be ranked higher p4p than Pac? No, because so far Pac has shown that his relatively limited skillset can go a long way. What he does, he does extremely well. It is a bit like Calzaghe (although Calzaghe of course is quite a lot more skilled anyway) - Calzaghe is also actually not technically perfect but what he does (extreme output) he does extremely well.

 

His defense is textbook IMO. Just not very good. He doesn't possess punch recognition. He keeps his hands up, but doesn't move his head as well as necessary. He doesn't fight well backing up, though that may be lack of experience.

 

His hook is fine when he throws it. He just doesn't throw it often. To his credit, no one has forced him to. Pavlik has him in that department.

 

He tends to almost throw it like Roy Jones Jr, rather than a shoulder turn, he tends to throw it as an arm punch and from distance.

A textbook left hook is the one you use at close range, a shoulder turned punch that follows in behind a good right cross.

 

I have seen him throw it with the shoulder turn when he wants to hit you with it. I have also seen him throw it as a decoy, much like you just described, and then follow it with that straight right.

Either way, I see his offense as textbook but limited. Still effective for him at this point. Elite level fighters are going to give him trouble unless he learns to adapt.