who is the best p4p ever

Stonehands, I agree with your analysis...The best description of a superior foundation you mention was what our boxing ancestors called, "bottom"...The ultimate greats had this "bottom"...

 

Well it must be true then as Mayweather is one of boxings most humble and honest guys:thumbsup

 

Learn to use punctuation characters!

Oh, and you are wrong.

Those 20 names are still 15 more than Jones fought ...

Was Marciano more skilled than Walcott or Charles?

Robinson´s left hooks are better than Jones and not by a little. Better movement, no way, sir. Robinson had one of the best footwork of all time. Jones may have a better defence but that´s due to him beeing a savety first fighter while Robinson was an offensive machine.
Jones did not only not have the "pure will to win" but also lacked the pure will to prove himself against the best. If they both would have fought at mw at the same time we would never see this fight ´cause your boy would duck Sugar Ray I.

I guess you don´t know what you were looking at then.

I know. :hat

Yeah but not one of these hooks had the power, accuracy and timing of Robinson. Those hooks Jones threw were shoe shining most of the time while Robinson threw every single one with bad intentions.
Roy was style, Robinson substance. That´s the difference.

WTF? Accusing Robinson of fighting no names and then coming up with Brannon to somehow prove how good Jones´ left hook is? That´s hilarious.

GET OUT!

 

That´s exactly what I was always saying about Jones. He lacked the most important criteria to be a up there, the desire.

Well, I think Jones talent is proven. When he stepped up he won. Against Toney and Ruiz. I know the argument is somewhat weak because they were made for him stylewise but still ...

Come on, Vinny Paz? VINY PAZ FFS! atsch Like tonyteb said, everybody can look good against these kind of fighters.

I agree. He would beat most of them but the more often he would fight the bigger the risk of losing would be and at one time it would be too big to overcome.

 

Jones's talent is unquestionable. I'm more interested in a fighter's level of skill.

 

No arguments there.

They all postured in a similar manner, as did most of the fighters of that era. The left hand hanging downward, the head tilted towards the rear foot/off-center, the body slanted to present a lesser target, etc. Again, it was simply how they applied their strategies within that stance that made them different. As for this disagreement, maybe we simply don't see eye to eye on what a "technician" truly is.

 

Difficult to guage but I do know that Marvelous Marvin Hagler, Azumah Nelson, Charley Burley, SRR and PBF are the most complete fighters I have seen at the highest level. I hsave great hopes for Ajose Olusegun.

 

you should'nt speak in threads about Robinson, because your clueless about his greatness :-(

 

Understood, but I'd still go with Burley.

In terms of effectiveness in the ring, I'd rank Burley over Moore. Moore jumps ahead based on experience, longevity and dominance, but Burley easily handled him and the difference seems to be matched skill plus superior athleticism. I'd say that boosts Burley expertise with lures and leading -the athleticism.

 

Ahhhh.... Burley was a different type of stylist and that is attested to by his contemporaries -including Moore.