Top 3 P4p Boxers In History

Fair enough... we'd agree that flash is athleticism, it is not sound technique, but effective nonetheless.

Do you believe that he would have been better served had he learned to effectively fight inside, and go to the body?

I count Ali, Jones, and Hamed as the premeire "athletically-based stylists". If Ali films were all there were for novices to learn from then they'd be a spike in concussions and brain damage among the denied generation! Heh.

Moore and Duran would never dream of attempting that because it was not cost-effective. Mechanics like them strive for minimum input and maximum results.

Ali took a lot more shots in his 30s than Duran did in his 30s. And you are wrong, about Duran at least, "fighting basically the same". Watch Duran-Leonard I, then watch the Hagler fight or the Barkley fight. It's a different fighter you are seeing.

Duran began as a puncher, became a boxer-puncher in his prime, swarmed when the WW situation called for it (Palomino, Leonard I), then became a counter-puncher as he aged. Ali's evolution was far more simple than that! And the reason why Duran could evolve as he did and took far, far less punishment than Ali notwithstanding twice as many fights, was because he essentially had a different foundation from Ali. This is yet another reason why I place Duran higher than Ali.

1. Sugaaaaah Rayyyyyyyyyyy Robinsonnnnnnnnnnnnnn!!
2. Harry Greb.
3. Henry Armstrong.
4. Sam Langford.
5. Willie "where'd he go" Pep.
6. Hands of Stone.
.
.
.
.
11. The Greatest Heavyweight who ever lived

I see things like judging distance, timing, and rolling with punches as the athletics skills. Aside from the jab and the right cross, Ali was not known for his offensive array, properly executed.

Speed, mobility, and activity whipped out-of-shape Liston -not "technique". Also, underrated power. Another asset more properly considered natural or athletic.

 

I see movement in general as a athleticism. Judging distance I would regard as much mental as it is physical. It's without question a learned skill within the trade of boxing when it's done well. A very athletic boxer could make bad decisions within range, lacking in natural instinct, thus not judging distance well. On the otherhand a fighter who's slow and ponderess might well be good at judging distance even though his poor condition prevents him from getting the best out of his judgement, thus being restricted althletically. Rolling with the punches sticks out as the most obvious choice.

When I think of athleticism I also think of co-ordination. Thats a vital aspect in a boxer who's well rounded from head to toe. Co-ordination is a must for any boxer to get the best out of his athletcism.

 

I agree.

 

I agree.

 

Point well taken on Duran's natural successful evolution from the spring of youth against lightweights to being the slower and older man fighting much bigger men, though I insist he subtly and cunningly adapted for opponents and during fights, but essentially in the same prime style he had polished as early as his defeat of Buchanan under Arcel.

You are absolutely right in pointing out Duran's excellent textbook fundamentals, which I consider better than Henry Armstrong's, who, by my accounts, was not very adept defensively. No man could do what Duran did without an excellent foundation, stonehands and a lion's heart.

I like your list. Harry Greb was a very complete fighter; yes, perhaps a notch above the aggressive Armstrong in roundedness, similar on offense, but better on defense, as his forays into the heavies proved.

And featherweight-to-heavyweight Sam Langford is simply extraordinary: how he managed to retain his punch through the divisions and give Jack Johnson himself a run for his money. And, similarly to Robinson, Duran and Greb, he had that great foundation that is doubtlessly the common denominator of the greatest pound-for-pounders.

 

I disagree to some degree. Of course, natural speed, balance and stamina is crucial to someone who builds his game on movement. But you also need technique to get the most out of this movement. Especially if you want to punch off of your movement, which really sets fighters out. To do this you need keep control of your feet and stance at all times, so you always are set to deliver punches. Also utilising good lateral movement isn't easy.

One fighter that I don't feel gets enough cudos for his offensive movement is Frazier. The bob and weave style is really hard to use. It requires a lot of timing for one thing.

 

I was thumbing thru some old Boxing & Wrestling magazines today and was interested to find the following article titled 'What the Critics are saying' in the February 1958 issue on page 40:
"Harry Wills on Sugar Ray
Jim Burchard in The New York World Telegram and Sun:
"Naturally I'll be rooting for him. He's an old friend, Why I knew him before he started to fight when he was just another kid around the neighborhood."

The speaker was Harry Wills, renowned heavyweight of 30 odd years ago who was headlined as the "Black Menace" and "Brown Panther." We visited old Harry at his home, 76 St. Nicholas Pl., to get his views and possibley a prediction on a modern Negro great, Sugar Ray Robinson.

Now 65, Wills looked in remarkably good shape. He explained he was just winding up one of his well-known fasting periods - this time a month on mile - and had dropped to 240 pounds. He best ring weight was 220.

"Robinson used to hang around Billy Grupp's," reminisced Wills. "I watched him launch his career. No, he never asked me for advice, although I could have taught him a few tricks."

Much as he admires Robinson for his boxing ability, gameness and outstanding ring smartness, Wills hesitated to put him on a par with famed smaller men of the past such as Stanley Ketchel or the original Joe Walcott.

"The old boxers hit harder," he declared. "Don't forget, Ketchel dropped Jack Johnson and Walcott, a 148-pounder, battled heavies successfully. They just don't build fighters like that these days. Not even Ray."

Wills, who ought to know, considering he was still a topnotcher at 35 and made his last stand at 42, is a bit fearful that Sugar Ray at 36 or 37 may find a 15-round task a bit rugged.

As he put it: "That Father Time is a real tough guy. Still all of us are built different. Ray may keep going a long spell yet."

------------------------
Personally, I'm biased toward Sam Langford on this subject, but consider the following:

* Sam was one of only two men who ever knocked out the great heavyweight contender Joe Jeannette over the course of Jeannett's 100+ fight career, the other fellow turning the trick in Joe's 3rd professional fight, and he was also one of only a handful to do the same to Wills, and the only man to turn that trick twice.

* Sam was the only man to knock out Wills, Jeannette, and McVea.

* Sam started out as a lightweight, and defeated the reigning lightweight champion Joe Gans, but was denied the title because he was 1 1/2 pounds over the lightweight limit. He drew with Joe Walcott in a welterweight title fight that most felt he deserved on points. He drew with middleweight champion Stanley Ketchel in a six-round non-title bout many felt he held back during in order to secure a longer title bout later that year, knocked out "Tiger" Flowers, he defeated former light-heavyweight champion "Philadelphia" Jack O'Brien, and over the course of his career defeated the following heavyweights among many, many others: Joe Jeannette, Harry Wills, "Gunboat" Smith, Sam McVea, "Iron" Hague, Jim Flynn, Bill Lang, George Godfrey, "Battling" Jim Johnson, John Lester Johnson, and Big Bill Tate.

* Sam won the heavyweight championship of England, Australia, Canada, and Mexico over the course of his career, in addition to the colored heavyweight championship at various times.

Robinson was obviously an incredible fighter, but I just can't help but be more impressed with Sam's feats.

 

Thanks for the insight, Cmoyle, and good luck with your book on Langford.

I share your fascination with the Tar Baby, whose exploits through the divisions are second to none. Prejudice held him back, no doubt, but his list of victims (a prime Joe Gans, for one) and his skills on paper argue forcibly for his inclusion at least among the top 5 all-time pound-for-pounders. In contrast, Robinson dominated two divisions.

The man had tremendous power and accuracy, excellent defense, very good stamina, a chin, I mean, Langford was a nightmare to face in the ring.