This is obviously a popular saying and seems to have some truth, fighter A beats B who beats C...and then C beats A (e.g. Hearns Duran Barkley). What style matchups are the most one-sided, which beats which most reliably?
This is an excellent question, but i think it is a bit of a myth. I would love to see some examples, but i am fairly sure that for every Dancer that beats a slugger, there a slugger that KOs the Dancer. I think it has more to do with Class, ability and performance of the fighters involved.
On paper, we can discuss this, but in reality you just don't know, ever. I'd say- the complete technician is has the best win ratio when coming up against all styles. You look at the success of Carlos Ortiz against many varying styles, and in a somewhat golden era in and around his weight divisions, and he does testify to the statement. In general- the outboxer>the mid-ring general the educated pressure fighter>the outboxer the mid-ring general>the educated pressure fighter I went for proper schooled type disciplines within the art rather than the likes of 'the slugger' and the 'slickster' etc, but it could be fun and interesting to discuss them also. Like i say though, this doesn;t really hold up in reality with consistency, like Ali said, the multiplying X factor is will to win, or call it greatness if you will.
I agree obviously the main factor is the fighter. But this little maxim is good I think for fighters with otherwise similar skill and intangibles. I think throwing in the "slugger" is worthwhile too. I'd list them as: Outboxer (Ali, Hearns) Swarmer (Frazier, Greb) Mid-ring general (Louis, Hopkins) Slugger/brawler (Foreman, Barkley) And the style matchups: Outboxer > mid-ring fighter Swarmer > outboxer Mid-ring fighter > swarmer How about the brawler/slugger, how do they fit in?
I think we need to throw in a few more factors. For example, a glass-jawed dancer vs a slugger is not a reliable bet. But an iron-jawed dancer is going to be horrible for any slugger really. There's also the factor that fighters can change their style for a fight, or even mid-fight. For example, Hagler was normally a mid-ring boxer type, with normal pace, but against Hearns he went ultra-aggressive swarming style from the beginning, and it worked great. If hagler had sat mid ring exchanging with Hearns, like he did with Duran, IMO he would have lost on points. Then you get into things like good trainers/cornermen telling their fighters when to change style. To throw a little extra into the ring - I'm trying to figure this out with a view to maybe betting on fights on occasion. If styles do make fights, then sometimes you should be able to predict when an upset is more likely than normal. With it being boxing, nothing is for sure, but all you need is the odds 2-1 in your favour when the public thinks it's 2-1 against.
Okay i see, it's about making money then JJ! The main thing in that kind of situation is to try and look at the fighters' weaknesses. Sometimes a weakness can prove fatal regardless of the style match-up. Like Paul Williams is a good swarmer, but he will always have that innacuracy deficiency in his make-up. I'd take Mayweather over him all day. But that said, the man has heart and has improved his game, to his credit, i thought he beat Martinez myself. Anyhow, back to topic- Outboxer (Ali, Hearns) Swarmer (Frazier, Greb) Mid-ring general (Louis, Hopkins) Slugger/brawler (Foreman, Barkley) the swarmer stylistically is set up to take advantage of the outboxer the mid-ring man can take advantage of the swarmer's advances the outboxer can outmaneuvre the slugger the slugger can possibly score ko's over the general the term 'mid-ring general' is probably not descriptive enough though, we have counter-punchers, defensive minded types, or all-round technicians, which are the most 'reliable' imo.
There are no absolutes in boxing..but in individual cases you can say that styles make fights. An exciting slugger vs a brilliant boxer, a great coxer vs a swarmer, etc., to a purist two master boxers, or a technician vs a mobile hit and run guy, etc., ...
