what do you consider a 'smart' fighter?
-
margaret thatcher
- Super Featherweight
- Posts: 39324
- Joined: 22 Jul 2019, 15:43
what do you consider a 'smart' fighter?
i notice a lot of the time people just conflate speedy, light hitting, or defensive minded boxers with being smart. whereas as more aggressive fighters and bangers dont get the same regard for their boxing brain
but to me a smart boxer isnt limited to a specific style or physical ability. it's more about knowing how to maximize the tools you do have and how to best exploit your opponents shortcomings.
a slow slugger for example can show some smartness by always stepping on the gas the last 10 seconds to end a round strong, knowing that his opponent relaxes during that time. it could be changing the angle of a shot knowing your opponent has a tendency to hold his hands at a specific position. intelligence doesnt have to just be someone diddling around jabbing and moving and clinching.
who do you consider smart fighters ? what is ring intelligence to you?
but to me a smart boxer isnt limited to a specific style or physical ability. it's more about knowing how to maximize the tools you do have and how to best exploit your opponents shortcomings.
a slow slugger for example can show some smartness by always stepping on the gas the last 10 seconds to end a round strong, knowing that his opponent relaxes during that time. it could be changing the angle of a shot knowing your opponent has a tendency to hold his hands at a specific position. intelligence doesnt have to just be someone diddling around jabbing and moving and clinching.
who do you consider smart fighters ? what is ring intelligence to you?
-
HomicideHenry
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 18722
- Joined: 08 Sep 2005, 00:43
Re: what do you consider a 'smart' fighter?
Jersey Joe Walcott comes to mind. He set up traps, made people feel comfortable and then he'd knock them out. The Walcott Waltz is one example of that.
As far as an offensive fighter being smart, I'd probably say Roberto Duran. It was all effective aggression, mainly by making people miss as he was coming in and getting them off balance or be left wide open.
Even a crude slugger has smarts. Marciano for instance made himself a smaller target to hit. Even at 45 years old sparring around with Ali the younger ex champion was surprised how difficult it was landing something solid on Marciano.
A lot of guys never get credit for being ring smart. I thought James Toney had more ring smarts than Roy Jones and Bernard Hopkins, but he lacked the discipline or athleticism to beat those guys.
Jesus Christ Almighty God bless you all
As far as an offensive fighter being smart, I'd probably say Roberto Duran. It was all effective aggression, mainly by making people miss as he was coming in and getting them off balance or be left wide open.
Even a crude slugger has smarts. Marciano for instance made himself a smaller target to hit. Even at 45 years old sparring around with Ali the younger ex champion was surprised how difficult it was landing something solid on Marciano.
A lot of guys never get credit for being ring smart. I thought James Toney had more ring smarts than Roy Jones and Bernard Hopkins, but he lacked the discipline or athleticism to beat those guys.
Jesus Christ Almighty God bless you all
Re: what do you consider a 'smart' fighter?
Rufus!HomicideHenry wrote: ↑31 Jul 2024, 01:39 Jersey Joe Walcott comes to mind. He set up traps, made people feel comfortable and then he'd knock them out. The Walcott Waltz is one example of that.
As far as an offensive fighter being smart, I'd probably say Roberto Duran. It was all effective aggression, mainly by making people miss as he was coming in and getting them off balance or be left wide open.
Even a crude slugger has smarts. Marciano for instance made himself a smaller target to hit. Even at 45 years old sparring around with Ali the younger ex champion was surprised how difficult it was landing something solid on Marciano.
A lot of guys never get credit for being ring smart. I thought James Toney had more ring smarts than Roy Jones and Bernard Hopkins, but he lacked the discipline or athleticism to beat those guys.
Jesus Christ Almighty God bless you all
Where've you been Brutha?
A smart fighter for me is one who when his game plan isn't working as well as he expected, he is quickly able to adapt
Re: what do you consider a 'smart' fighter?
Way too many smart fighters past and present to start naming ,, but what i consider a smart fighter is someone who works out his opponent very quickly and adjusts if neccesary , will say in pro boxing fighter and trainer usually know who there boxing and can study or look at the opponent ,
but its important in the ameteurs to teach a boxer how to think for himself , spot mistakes early and adjust to the competition , because quite often you don't know anything about your opponent , he drops his right when he jabs your boy best be able to spot it , if he can't opportunities escape
but its important in the ameteurs to teach a boxer how to think for himself , spot mistakes early and adjust to the competition , because quite often you don't know anything about your opponent , he drops his right when he jabs your boy best be able to spot it , if he can't opportunities escape
-
margaret thatcher
- Super Featherweight
- Posts: 39324
- Joined: 22 Jul 2019, 15:43
Re: what do you consider a 'smart' fighter?
true, jersey joe a very smart fighter indeed, ultra wily with ko powerHomicideHenry wrote: ↑31 Jul 2024, 01:39 Jersey Joe Walcott comes to mind. He set up traps, made people feel comfortable and then he'd knock them out. The Walcott Waltz is one example of that.
As far as an offensive fighter being smart, I'd probably say Roberto Duran. It was all effective aggression, mainly by making people miss as he was coming in and getting them off balance or be left wide open.
Even a crude slugger has smarts. Marciano for instance made himself a smaller target to hit. Even at 45 years old sparring around with Ali the younger ex champion was surprised how difficult it was landing something solid on Marciano.
A lot of guys never get credit for being ring smart. I thought James Toney had more ring smarts than Roy Jones and Bernard Hopkins, but he lacked the discipline or athleticism to beat those guys.
Jesus Christ Almighty God bless you all
Re: what do you consider a 'smart' fighter?
Calzaghe, different game plans
Re: what do you consider a 'smart' fighter?
Someone who comes in with a good gameplan or someone who can adapt their gameplan mid-fight. Someone who can clearly nullify their opponent's strengths and exploit their weaknesses. A fighter that can fight in different styles or techniques for different purposes and still look highly skilled doing it. A fighter who can see what is working and spot openings when others might not.
-
Controversial
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 9218
- Joined: 13 Jul 2002, 18:29
Re: what do you consider a 'smart' fighter?
Nicky Piper was smart, he was in Mensa :-)
-
Ruthless-RKO
- Welterweight
- Posts: 102946
- Joined: 24 Apr 2016, 11:59
Re: what do you consider a 'smart' fighter?
Wouldn't call Crawford the biggest hitter or a KO artist, but he's stopped his last 11 opponents and there's some good names on there,.
He's a smart fighter.
He smells blood and he can find a finish.
GGG was a smart boxer.. He had a very boxing brain.
He's a smart fighter.
He smells blood and he can find a finish.
GGG was a smart boxer.. He had a very boxing brain.
Re: what do you consider a 'smart' fighter?
Also someone who can "work out" a referee.
I used to think John Ruiz was quite a smart fighter - he beat a fair few fighters who he probably had less of a skill set than, and quite often people would say "oh he shouldn't have won that, he should have had points deducted" - but he didn't and he got away with some of his tactics and knew he could.
Anyway, I would just say Floyd Mayweather - people who know me will know I say Floyd Mayweather for most things, but the boxing IQ of him was something else and how often did he get hurt more than once in the same fight. The Mosley fight was the dictionary definition of ring smart. I will never forget him watching (between rounds) of him on the big screen getting hurt by Mosley. He made sure Mosley never hurt him again.
I used to think John Ruiz was quite a smart fighter - he beat a fair few fighters who he probably had less of a skill set than, and quite often people would say "oh he shouldn't have won that, he should have had points deducted" - but he didn't and he got away with some of his tactics and knew he could.
Anyway, I would just say Floyd Mayweather - people who know me will know I say Floyd Mayweather for most things, but the boxing IQ of him was something else and how often did he get hurt more than once in the same fight. The Mosley fight was the dictionary definition of ring smart. I will never forget him watching (between rounds) of him on the big screen getting hurt by Mosley. He made sure Mosley never hurt him again.
-
keithmoonhangover
- Cruiserweight
- Posts: 17022
- Joined: 16 Sep 2010, 10:42
Re: what do you consider a 'smart' fighter?
For me, it's simple. A smart fighter is someone who doesn't get hit much.
-
gregregegg
- Lightweight
- Posts: 9183
- Joined: 29 Sep 2017, 04:08
Re: what do you consider a 'smart' fighter?
A smart boxer is often seen as some kind of master technician. There’s a reason these guys are often light hitting…. Cause if they hit hard they would have KO’d everyone early and never learnt the art in as much depth.
Imaging in Loma or Haney or shakur had tank power… or if usyk hit like wilder… or if Floyd was a lights out puncher… they wouldent of developed into the boxers they are….
But that’s more a technical boxer… to me a smart boxer is anyone that leans into there strengths and makes the game plan work…. Often these guys are technicians, but not always… wilder is a classic example of a non technical smart boxer..
he never looked like a smart boxer , but even with a lack of skill he found a way to make that right hand land (partially smart management too)
Imaging in Loma or Haney or shakur had tank power… or if usyk hit like wilder… or if Floyd was a lights out puncher… they wouldent of developed into the boxers they are….
But that’s more a technical boxer… to me a smart boxer is anyone that leans into there strengths and makes the game plan work…. Often these guys are technicians, but not always… wilder is a classic example of a non technical smart boxer..
he never looked like a smart boxer , but even with a lack of skill he found a way to make that right hand land (partially smart management too)
-
Frostieballs
- Super Bantamweight
- Posts: 2020
- Joined: 15 Aug 2020, 17:38
Re: what do you consider a 'smart' fighter?
Yes, I do worry a bit though if it would have effected his longevity. The way he made Bellew burn himself out and was always in control (despite losing rounds) - so calm under pressure and in reality, he did the same vs Fury (when Fury got ontop - he had an answer) and clearly at 37? he has already had a long career, not sure though I would coach a fighter to fight like that always - e.g. letting a fighter build some momentum, whilst always being in control. Its a sort of "rope a dope" without the ropes.
But yes he is a brilliant fighter to watch for that reason and it is incredible how a fighter of his style is beating the heavyweight monsters. He's not especially "quick" with lightling reflexes - at Cruiser he could "outstrength" his opponents, at heavyweight he has outsmarted his opponents.
-
Sweet Dick Willie
- Super Bantamweight
- Posts: 1116
- Joined: 22 Mar 2021, 13:44
Re: what do you consider a 'smart' fighter?
Right! This is how I see it too. Another "smart" boxer for me would be Froch - brilliant at imposing his style on his opponent, even when at a significant speed / skill deficit.gregregegg wrote: ↑31 Jul 2024, 07:24 A smart boxer is often seen as some kind of master technician. There’s a reason these guys are often light hitting…. Cause if they hit hard they would have KO’d everyone early and never learnt the art in as much depth.
Imaging in Loma or Haney or shakur had tank power… or if usyk hit like wilder… or if Floyd was a lights out puncher… they wouldent of developed into the boxers they are….
But that’s more a technical boxer… to me a smart boxer is anyone that leans into there strengths and makes the game plan work…. Often these guys are technicians, but not always… wilder is a classic example of a non technical smart boxer..
he never looked like a smart boxer , but even with a lack of skill he found a way to make that right hand land (partially smart management too)
-
Grilling Machine
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 3159
- Joined: 16 Sep 2005, 02:28
Re: what do you consider a 'smart' fighter?
I rewatched Pirog's knockout of Jacobs recently and that was a standout for me.
Pirog went fully square and wide open, selling pitter-pat righthands as ostensible feints to lock Jacobs into respecting his left as a ready counter, when the left itself was the real feint. When the follow-up to a feint is a feint! But so, so dangerous in this case, and yet it worked. The psychology of knowing Jacobs was angling for a counter but wouldn't strike at the first dip of the float.
Putting ourselves in Danny's shoes we could probably all imagine falling for it ourselves, and then being so gutted to think Pirog was momentarily there for the taking. As often happens, he committed to an opening he knew had closed through his split-second frustration at missing it. All of Pirog's risk-taking design.
Eyebrow-raising risks that yield rewards or go unpunished are usually an indicator of fight-reading smarts. Carparks aside.
(I'd have made Golovkin the 2:1 favourite against Pirog, but feel Pirog would've won more rounds for as long as it went, hence believe he'd have won had he reached the final bell. Maybe. But he was ageing when Golovkin was the scariest pressure fighter of his generation.)
Pirog went fully square and wide open, selling pitter-pat righthands as ostensible feints to lock Jacobs into respecting his left as a ready counter, when the left itself was the real feint. When the follow-up to a feint is a feint! But so, so dangerous in this case, and yet it worked. The psychology of knowing Jacobs was angling for a counter but wouldn't strike at the first dip of the float.
Putting ourselves in Danny's shoes we could probably all imagine falling for it ourselves, and then being so gutted to think Pirog was momentarily there for the taking. As often happens, he committed to an opening he knew had closed through his split-second frustration at missing it. All of Pirog's risk-taking design.
Eyebrow-raising risks that yield rewards or go unpunished are usually an indicator of fight-reading smarts. Carparks aside.
(I'd have made Golovkin the 2:1 favourite against Pirog, but feel Pirog would've won more rounds for as long as it went, hence believe he'd have won had he reached the final bell. Maybe. But he was ageing when Golovkin was the scariest pressure fighter of his generation.)
-
TheLeprechaun
- Super Middleweight
- Posts: 5164
- Joined: 27 Jun 2013, 20:42
Re: what do you consider a 'smart' fighter?
HomicideHenry wrote: ↑31 Jul 2024, 01:39 Jersey Joe Walcott comes to mind. He set up traps, made people feel comfortable and then he'd knock them out. The Walcott Waltz is one example of that.
As far as an offensive fighter being smart, I'd probably say Roberto Duran. It was all effective aggression, mainly by making people miss as he was coming in and getting them off balance or be left wide open.
Even a crude slugger has smarts. Marciano for instance made himself a smaller target to hit. Even at 45 years old sparring around with Ali the younger ex champion was surprised how difficult it was landing something solid on Marciano.
A lot of guys never get credit for being ring smart. I thought James Toney had more ring smarts than Roy Jones and Bernard Hopkins, but he lacked the discipline or athleticism to beat those guys.
Jesus Christ Almighty God bless you all
Good post. I agree. Marciano gets a lot of stick but I was quite impressed with the footage of him. He looked very difficult to hit and seemed to be very heavy handed indeed. I think Salvador Sanchez doesn't get the respect he deserves. The chap could fight at all ranges and when you are dispatching Azumah Nelson in that fashion it doesn't really get any more impressive. I like fighters who can win from the outside but come in and fight at any range if need be or if they feel like changing things up. Bowe is a good example in that first Holyfield fight. He was a very hard man to beat that night.
I suppose for me it comes down to the blending of offence and defence. Sanchez is the best I've seen in that regard. Terrific head movement and upper body movement to counter opponents or create openings to land his own punches. I enjoy seeing defensive prowess mixed in with a devastating offensive game at every range. Again, Bowe Holyfield 1 is a great example. Bowe was actually blocking, parrying and rolling with punches beautifully and he was getting very nice shots off all night. Throws a cuffing body shot that he knows Holyfield can take on the inside. Throws it again but then comes up with great speed with the uppercut which put Holyfield all over the place. Lulled him into a false sense of security there. Just nice to watch.
-
Syntax Error
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 9017
- Joined: 22 Apr 2005, 08:00
Re: what do you consider a 'smart' fighter?
Winky Wright.
Re: what do you consider a 'smart' fighter?
That's pretty much what I would have said too.Giancarlo wrote: ↑31 Jul 2024, 01:49Rufus!HomicideHenry wrote: ↑31 Jul 2024, 01:39 Jersey Joe Walcott comes to mind. He set up traps, made people feel comfortable and then he'd knock them out. The Walcott Waltz is one example of that.
As far as an offensive fighter being smart, I'd probably say Roberto Duran. It was all effective aggression, mainly by making people miss as he was coming in and getting them off balance or be left wide open.
Even a crude slugger has smarts. Marciano for instance made himself a smaller target to hit. Even at 45 years old sparring around with Ali the younger ex champion was surprised how difficult it was landing something solid on Marciano.
A lot of guys never get credit for being ring smart. I thought James Toney had more ring smarts than Roy Jones and Bernard Hopkins, but he lacked the discipline or athleticism to beat those guys.
Jesus Christ Almighty God bless you all
Where've you been Brutha?
A smart fighter for me is one who when his game plan isn't working as well as he expected, he is quickly able to adapt
Smart fighters have a plan B or C.
Smart fighters try something different if what they are doing isn't working.
Whereas dumb fighters do the same thing over and over regardless of it's success and can be beaten the same way every time - Dillian Whyte with thw uppercut for example.
Re: what do you consider a 'smart' fighter?
Usyk and Crawford both very intelligent boxers.
-
jameswilson
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 13411
- Joined: 08 Jan 2004, 18:01
Re: what do you consider a 'smart' fighter?
I always thought the way Ryan Rhodes beat Jamie Moore was smart.
Re: what do you consider a 'smart' fighter?
And the way he lost to Jason Matthews, not so much!jameswilson wrote: ↑07 Aug 2024, 21:39 I always thought the way Ryan Rhodes beat Jamie Moore was smart.
-
black panther
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 4097
- Joined: 11 Dec 2003, 07:06
Re: what do you consider a 'smart' fighter?
Yes Calzaghe came to mind for me too. In the Kessler fight, early doors was getting caught with straight rights but made adjustments accordingly.
For me that's the sign of a smart fighter that he gathers information on his opponent then is able to make adjustments mid-fight.
Another fighter I would say was very smart was Kosta Tszyu. Yes he had ridiculous power but he wasn't as fast of hand or foot of the likes of Zab Judah or Sharma Mitchell. Yet he was able to figure them out quickly and time them with bazooka right hand.
Also the finishing job he does of Mitchell in the second fight was just superb - his punch selection in the heat of the moment led to a clinical finish.
Re: what do you consider a 'smart' fighter?
Barrera was a smart fighter, he adjusted his style as he got older and slowed down