The Greatest Defences In Boxing - all suggestions welcome

Good post mate, good examples, but I'm sorry, I think it's lunacy to put Hamed-Robinson in there. Hamed's defence was dreadful, just ****ing dreadful! Another guy earlier on suggested (it may have been in the General I can't remember as I posted this in both) that clip from Cotto-Margarito where Cotto drops his hands around round 4 and slips a few shots from Margarito and while it is a great clip for the purpose of a video, we all know it was Cotto's dire defence which led to the crushing defeat in the end. If you suggest Hamed-Robinson in the same spirit (a fighter with a weak defence who has exemplified decent head movement at times that could be showcased for a video on defence) then fair enough, good call, but your comment:

Naz at his peak, hands by his side, awesome D.

leads me to believe you think Naz at his peak had an awesome defence, which IMO is just crazy. Anyone can look good against a mediocre opponent (Robinson's career record 32-17-2!!!) slipping punches and playing for the crowd, but this means nothing as any decent fighter can embarrass journeymen if that's his personality to do so. Hamed wasn't slipping many against Barrera (or even Kevin Kelley, or even ****ing Augie Sanchez!) when the going was tougher. Whitaker showed great defensive skills throughout his career (Ramirez II especially but also many fights through to De La Hoya), Hopkins too (especially Trinidad), Toney too (many but Jirov in particular stands out as an example of defensive skill minus mobility), Mayweather too (N'Dou, Chavez, and of course De La Hoya), as did many other truly great defensive fighters. They showed great defence v great opponents.

Hamed did not. Examples of decent fighters looking slick eluding the attacks of journeymen are common as muck.

As I said, I dunno if you meant Hamed-Robinson in the way the other guy offered up Cotto-Margo just as a clip idea, but I thought this was worth pointing out as I got a jolt seeing Hamed's name alongside that of Pep and Ali in a discussion of defence.

 

I couldn't disagree more.

Hamed was 21 when he beat Robinson in '95, 23 when he beat Kelley in '97, 27 when he lost to Barrera in '01. He gave the greatest performance of his career against the best opponent he ever fought (other than MAB) one year before the Barrera loss- stopping Vuyani Bungu in 4. After the Kelley fight where his defence shortcomings were exposed, he actually tightened up and stopped being as reckless (other than v Augie Sanchez). So I don't think the Hamed who fought Robinson was different from the Hamed that fought Kelley or was still fighting in 2000, other than he became a little more cautious if anything. Against Barrera, yes he fought that night looking for single shots, but I don't think that he had adopted these same tactics consistently for the years 1997-2001, he only did so that night v Barrera because he knew he did not have the defence or the skills to outpoint MAB and knew his best chance of victory was connecting with a flush shot and then pushing for a KO or stoppage.

The real difference between the Hamed who fought Robinson and the Hamed who fought Kelley and Barrera was standard of opposition. Steve Robinson (32-17-2 career record, 21-9-1 when he fought Naz) was a fighter who was clearly a level or two below Naz in terms of ability. His performance on the night and his career in general prove this. Anyone can look good against mediocre opposition. Put Carlos Baldomir or Vernon Forrest in with a mediocre opponent, it's possible they could look pretty fast. Put Sergio Mora or Paulie Malignaggi in with a mediocre opponent, it's possible they could stop him and look like they carry some power. If you are fighting someone nowhere near as good as you, it's too easy to look good, and you can fool people into thinking you have attributes that in reality you don't have, and fighting better opposition exposes this. Boxing history is littered with guys who were brought up feasting on bums and built up to be the next best thing, but who quickly stopped looking so hot when the opposition was stepped up.

If Hamed had tried to fight against Barrera the way he fought against Robinson, he would have been stopped early. Keeping his hands low, sticking his chin out, relying only on reflex to avoid punches, clowning around - Hamed knew he couldn't fight in this way against better opposition, that's why he had to look for KO's as he didn't have the skills to take on someone like Barrera in a boxing match. He NEVER had a good defence or good skills

And I see no parallels whatsoever with Tyson's late career. If you take his late career to be his 2nd defeat to Holyfield in 1997 up until his last fight against Kevin McBride in 2005, this period began when Tyson was 31 and ended when he was 39. Tyson's style never changed, he simply was too old and worn to fight as effectively as his late 1980s pomp. Unlike Hamed, this was mainly due to age. Tyson was a high octane aggressive fighter in his youth, he could not maintain this style as he aged. In Hamed's late career, he was in his mid-20s and produced the best performance of his career v Bungu, beat some decent opponents well, and never lost another fight other than to a great fighter. Tyson's only wins were against poor opposition (Francis, Savarese, Etienne) and he was stopped badly a few times (Williams, McBride, Lewis).

Hamed does not deserve a mention in a discussion of great defence IMO.