well, its not hard to put yourself in arguello's position in that fight (pryor 2)
he'd faced an onslaught from pryor from the off and when he tried to hurt his opponent - no effect!! decked in the 4th, he bravely got up and tried to knock aaron out but the guy never stopped moving and firing shots. if you have seen the picture of AA sitting in his corner towards the end of that battle you'd know what i was talking about. outfought, outbattled, thoroughly defeated.
i was refering to the second fight. but still, in both bouts pryor fought the kind of fight that didnt allow AA to press forward and dictate, though he did give it a go. i'm ready to concede that alexis shades it over pryor as who was the best p4p but in a match up results speak for themselves.
I give more credit to Arguello than you do: IMHO, he put up a tremendous fight, & did NOT get "absolutely outfought" during thr course fo the fight. The major factor was Pryor being able to withstand Alexis' power. It was a close score on my cards until the TKO.
perhaps i understated it when i said alexis "gave it a go" and yes he did put up a tremendous fight in both matches. nevertheless, he didnt make the final bell in either fight. this had a lot to do with pryors ability to absorb punishment without effect but that is discounting aarons offensive superiority; you dont lose a fight just because the other guy can take a great shot. alexis said afterwards "when i was down in the 10th i wanted the referee to keep counting and to hurry up, i'm taking too many punches in here for no reason."
by the way i didnt understand your last sentence about "mileage"
By "mileage", I am attempting to say you & I are having different opinions, although we are watching the same thing(s). Hence, our "mileage" is the same, but it also varies. Sorry for the confusion.
Why is the mention of Pryor's iron chin discounting Pryor's offensive superiority? For starters, I don't believe Pryor was offensively "superior" to Alexis as a fighter(or inferior). They were both having success against each other in that department.
Your quote from Arguello is also taken from their second bout-which I don't hold against him, which I stated previously. Was he "absolutely outfought" & "desperately confused"? Yeah, maybe in their SECOND bout-I won't disgaree vehmently with that.
But Arguello WASN'T in their first meeting. That was a CLOSE fight.
As for the original question, "What is a complete fighter?", I would point out something that Goodnight Irene touched on: The ability to handle any style of opponent.
That is actually more important.
A fighter can have many different talents, but that doesn't mean he can put it all together on a consistent basis. He may seem to "have all of the tools", but I wouldn't consider him a complete fighter.
However another fighter who doesn't seem to have "all of the tools" can be a better fighter if he able to use the talents that he does have to win against different kinds of opponents. He is actually more of a "complete fighter."
Being able to consistently excute strategies to defeat vastly different styles of fighters who have great ability is what really counts and which very few fighters have been able to do.
