I could be way off here, but I think Kel Brook does a lot of stuff right. Keeps a good guard, nice straight right hand, stiff jab etc...
I agree but one thing which I don't like about Brook is he lunges in with his right hand and over commits when he throws it. He's got respectable reach he should keep people on the end of that right hand.
Román gonzález. Miguel Cotto. Genadi Golovkin. Probably the most "textbook" of those three is miguel cotto, the other two have a good amount of natural talent in his boxing, cotto relies more on what he has learnt and trained aswell as in a very ordered boxing style than in natural talent. I'm not saying he's not talented, I'm just saying that his training and orthodoxsism (whatever) is more important in his boxing than his talent. Specially at the very beginning of his career, now it's not so obvious, but back then he was THE textbook boxer. I dont consider rigo a "textbook" fighter, he relies more on his unreal natural talent than in textbooks imho. You cannot learn "to rigo" reading a textbook.
Cotto isn't textbook, he has poor balance and no right hand. When he does throw it it is an arm punch
Yes, so? What's it got to do with his eyes? You can become coordinated with your weaker side and learn to throw instead of pushing.
IMHO Terence Crawford's style is the epitome of textbook boxing. The majority of his recent fights have been technical masterpieces.
There probably isnt a textbook boxer on the planet itll just be the case that some are closer to it than others. Its hard enough to find a boxer who displays very good balance throughout a bout.
First thing to do is to define what's a textbook boxer. Because it looks like it's not enough to do it everything as the texbook says, but you have to do it prefectly also. What's a textbook boxer? then we will maybe find a boxer who fits into the definition.
A textbook boxer is a balanced boxer who is responsible (plays the percentages) offensively and defensively. Lomachenko, Golovkin, Ward and Gonzales come to mind.