Eder Jofre! Sorry. Anyway, him, Gene Tunney, [url]Chris Eubank (link),[/url] and Sugar Ray Leonard (remember, he avoided not only a Benitez or Hearns rematch like the plague, he stayed away from Aaron Pryor and Mike McCallum...choosing the relative big-money safety of a rematch with a super-bloated 200+lb Duran...you lose 50lbs in a handful of training weeks and take on a tough bout...check the interesting history on how Leonard dangled a huge bonus in order to tighten the fight date..."no mas!"...so smart)
No, success be can due to numerous things, as you know, not just well-polished technique. Marquez is more technical than Ali and all that. Whoever is the "most technical" means, to me anyway, whoever applies the best technique, with technique just being skill, which can be difficult to define itself. Pep is more skilled than Tunney, I think, and by quite a bit, even if he's less traditionally correct with the whole textbook kind of thing.
To me, when judging technique you have to have some definition of excellence, otherwise it all becomes about the technique getting the job done. Under this definitio, Marciano arguably has better technique than Holmes, which obviously isn't true in a stricter sense of the definition. The broader definition of "boxing skill" can take into account any non-physical boxing attributes and how they affect a fighter's chances in any given fight. Or that's how I like to think of it.
Yeah, that's my view of it. What I seem to be getting at is there appears to be this notion that "technical" is a specific kind of style - the traditional kind of basic style taught to virtually all new fighters. you say Tunney's more technically correct than Pep, so does that mean you believe him to be more skilled? Pep's moves in the ring look quite a bit more advanced to me, and I think he visibly appears the more skilled fighter, and I don't consider any of that just a part of superior physical attributes or whatever. Pep deviates from the so called textbook style more often, which I'm sure is what you're referring to when you say he's less correct, but his level of pure boxing technique is notably higher in my eyes. It'd be more difficult to master Pep's style than Tunney's even if you have someone who's talent allows them to do both. I don't know, I'm confusing myself.
Right. Technical, to me, just means best at applying all of the various techniques of boxing, which can just be classified as skill. Therefore, asking who was the "best technical boxer" is the same as asking for the most skilled boxer.