What makes a fighter GREAT!? His skills or his resume?

Having a great numerical record isn't the same as having a great resume.

I'm pretty sure the point of the thread was to call out the more talented fighters who did what you just mentioned despite their skills, in comparison to less talented fighters who accomplished more because they were more courageous and willing to take on the risks.

 

<---- Cigarettes and beer for that guy.

 

both

 

You gotta stop with these PBF subliminal threads. You make like 1 thread a day about him. Did he beat your favorite fighter or something?

 

You need BOTH to be ranked with the very elite but you can get ranked just beneath the Robinson`s & Ali`s if you have a phenomenal resume & decent-good skills or if you are outrageously talented & have a decent-good resume.

All the guys in the top 10 lists are superb fighters & fought other great fighters I do believe.

 

Pernell Whittaker was the best I saw but he is not even close to my top 50. The sweet science is one thing but we are talking about the fight game. Ray Leonard could have replicated Whittakers skills but Sweet pea only had a plan A Ray Leonerd had a plan C. To be great you have to fight out of your comfort zone and succeed.

 

Both for me :yep

 

True boxers like Chris John is a good example. That dude is undefeated but if you look at his resume it's not that impressive. Juan Manuel Marquez and Derrick Gainer is the only good ones he beat and everybody knows the marquez fight is controversial :good

 

I'm guessing by skills you mean crazy athletic ability such as RJJ or Meldrik Taylor. Someone mentioned a more skillful fighter loosing to a less skillful one cuz of chin or less skillful reasons. Even having a great chin is a technique. Oscar DLH admitted to biting hard on mouthpiece cuz it makes you harder to get ko'd. Claims he's bitten right through them before during fights and says reason he's never been ko'd from head shot.
Of course this comes to competition. Without the skills you're not gonna get very far in a boxing career. Making your way through a career of "high" competition should match the level of skill of a boxer. Great skills without the heart to display them is just like watching someone shadow box in the corner of a gym. It says nothing.

 

both- but at the end of the day- who you fought and how you fought them counts the most.

look at say sugar v floyd. floyd has the most impressive skills-but didnt fight the best of his era. sugar ray leonard had mad skills AND fought the best of his era- won some- lost some- but fought them all nonetheless.

one is a symbol for the era we live in - excess, self inflated hype, materialism and misplaced entitlement- and the other - a symbol for all times- true class, sportsmanship, bravery and greatness. you dont need to be larry merchant to pick which one is which.

 

Id say a combination of SKILL and his RESUME...I mean you can fight anyone and everyone if you can get the fights...I wouldn't base any great fighter based on just skill or just there resume...Also look at how he got the victories he got...

Did he lose alot of rounds in the process of winning fights and becoming a GREAT FIGHTER??

Who did he lose to?

Who did he beat??