- Joined
- May 12, 2016
- Messages
- 13,847
- Reaction score
- 10,679
Obviously body type will often play a role here (lankiness, reach and/or height allow for a fighter to be rangy/rangier assuming they know how to use it, and we're assuming this) as do physical attributes to varying degrees. Pep's legs & foot speed for mobility, for example, or great hand-eye coordination for tracking an opponent's movement to maintain the distance and keep them stuck on the outside. Some choose to box & move (and box on the move) while others would rather hold the center of the ring more so they're not in danger of being on the ropes or cornered (falls into ringcraft). Of the names listed for "pure" boxers (out-boxers) you should ask yourselves how many of them have comfortably outboxed or even outclassed other highly regarded "pure" boxers when their opponents were at their best (weight class included), or, hadn't slipped too much (didn't lose more than a step or so). I take it that TS means the most skilled / the most proficient outside operators when he says "best" pure boxer.
This thread has been done many times before on some of the other boxing forums (like BoxRec's & The Sweet Science's) where boxer-punchers and counter-punchers are often lumped in due to the overlap in styles bleeding into each other & multi-stylists, but, their intentions should be factored in since some look for the finish and not just for controlling and skillfully outpointing their opponents for long stretches of the fight or for the entire fight. Not leaving it in the hands of the judges is an important factor to take into account since it can change a boxer's entire strategy out of fear of getting shorted on the cards. That and the urge from the major networks, fans and media pressuring fighters to be more entertaining or risk losing future slots (TV dates), not becoming a PPV level star or being blackballed outright (Rigo). The most highly skilled boxers tend not to be very exciting to casuals and the general audience unless they can do it in style (with swag), hurt opponents, score knockdowns or get knockouts.
Examples given should have a varied and educated jab to be in this discussion. They shouldn't be head hunting often with their jabs and forget about jabbing mid and low or looking to only throw very stiff power jabs with the intention to bust up an opponent in order to inflict damage. Variation on their jabs should be present, notably the standard jab, flick & touch jab. Most of their work will naturally be with their jabs and then the 2, straight right or straight left.
This thread has been done many times before on some of the other boxing forums (like BoxRec's & The Sweet Science's) where boxer-punchers and counter-punchers are often lumped in due to the overlap in styles bleeding into each other & multi-stylists, but, their intentions should be factored in since some look for the finish and not just for controlling and skillfully outpointing their opponents for long stretches of the fight or for the entire fight. Not leaving it in the hands of the judges is an important factor to take into account since it can change a boxer's entire strategy out of fear of getting shorted on the cards. That and the urge from the major networks, fans and media pressuring fighters to be more entertaining or risk losing future slots (TV dates), not becoming a PPV level star or being blackballed outright (Rigo). The most highly skilled boxers tend not to be very exciting to casuals and the general audience unless they can do it in style (with swag), hurt opponents, score knockdowns or get knockouts.
Examples given should have a varied and educated jab to be in this discussion. They shouldn't be head hunting often with their jabs and forget about jabbing mid and low or looking to only throw very stiff power jabs with the intention to bust up an opponent in order to inflict damage. Variation on their jabs should be present, notably the standard jab, flick & touch jab. Most of their work will naturally be with their jabs and then the 2, straight right or straight left.
