Why couldn't a one dimensional fighter be the best fighter in the world?

Your premise was that he could beat everyone. This fantasy fighter does not exist and never will, unless we create cybernetic robots.

 

Speed won't be an Issue and Ricky Isn't that slow either. Hatton was fast at ww too and It didn't matter, speed doesn't always win.

 

My unrealistic premise is not the reason why people disagree with the logical conclusion. They do so because they have a fettish for fighters with "smooth skillz" to such an extent that they couldn't possibly consider a more effective but less fancy fighter better than them. Silly!

 

Your premise includes beating smooth fighters also... Since you say that he could beat anyone. It's like saying, imagine a chess player who could always win, if he utilized offensive tactics. No one can...

Or a football team that has great offense, ie old brazil, and Spain. There will sooner or later be someone who has both good offense and defense, and will mix it up, and having read how you like to play. Then negate it.

 

ok. its a case to case basis. vic dar is a one dimentional fighter and no way hed be the best fighter in the world. pac was still a one dimentional fighter back morales II and i ranked him as the best fitgher p4p after that fight

 

Floyd Mayweather?

 

Did he beat him then? atsch

 

Great offensive skills goes a long way. Many great offensively boxers bulldozers smooth skillers. ie Andrade vs Bute.

 

You didn't say if he won or lost. You said he's never fought a talented fighter like Manny before. And yes he has in Floyd Mayweather. Don't see where I'm wrong here.

 

Because it means you have limited things to work with, even if you have several intangibles that are phenom level intangibles, there are more style openings for someone to defeat you with, even if you fight mostly consistent top fighters that suit you due to a defect in their fighting that you can exploit.

Though it's especially interesting when a phenomenal 1 dimension fighter gets clearly defeated twice by a guy that doesn't suit him and gets massive credit for paper victories, not so much credit for making it competitive and being a major ***** for the opponent(who doesn't love this), but the paper victories show much about the subject that other posters were bringing up in the thread.

But to answer the philisophical side -

Yes, a fighter could be the best in all of boxing if he was 1 dimensional if he had attributes we've never seen to supplement it.

But, no such fighter has ever existed and it's not Manny Pacquaio.

 

No, Diaz aside from his 1-dimensionality has no great physical attributes. Pac has phenomenal speed+timing and has potent punching power, that's why he was able to totally destroy another 1 dimensional fighter.

Not to mention, Diaz is by no means highly skilled at his 1 dimension, Pac is highly skilled at swarming in and out with timed, quick power punches.

 

you cant convince a natural born pac hater no matter what

 

Excellent boxers can be very one dimensional. Calderon and Spinks for example, are one dimensional fighters, they only have way of fighting to work with, no matter how effective against their opposition.

 

I completely agree with this - good post.

 

No, he is one dimensional. Even if he is not predictable, he has one way of fighting and will always fight in that way.

Pac swarms in and out with well timed shots, preferabbly from range, inside he's decent but would never be able to switch things up and truly win a fight inside because when smothered, his short punches are not the best and he also doesn't put combinations together precisely, his combo's that have been most effective have been from a great timed punch, which opens the opponent up for him to use his speed and get in looser or sloppier work, either way it wouldn't work inside well and he never takes it inside because he's not effective with it.

- Scratch effective inside fighting off.

From the backfoot he's proven wholly ineffective, so he would never be able to switch up to going from the backfoot and picking his opponent off to gain a victory.

- Scratch emergency boxing off.

Lastly, even though effective and unpredictable, when has he switched gears and done something else than his signature work? People point to Barrera 2, but that was more Barrera than anything. Barrera completely controlled the footwork and positioning in the fight, but lacked the needed attributes at that stage in his career to pull the trigger on counters where Pac was completely open and was inactive because of it. Pac still did his same routine and accumulated rounds because of it, he in no 'outboxed' Barrera like some Pac fans say and could not switch his routine up to blow out an inactive opponent looking to survive, because he only has 1 effective style of fighting, even if it is indeed highly impressive/elite and unpredictable.