Create your Fantasy HW Boxer (no pun intended)

TarkanX · Post by **TarkanX** » 17 Sep 2007, 00:39

Basically what this is, is you get the chance to mold your "perfect" boxer, the way you would have always liked a boxer to be. I have laid out attributes for each boxer, and you chose a boxer in HW history that you would like a boxer to have such attribute. Now, this is where it gets fuzzy, your boxer needs to be realistic, meaning he can have the strength of say George Foreman, but there is little way that he is having the quickness of Ali, or you can assign a boxer to be a Boxer/Out-Fighter, but they aren't going to be having heavy punching power.

This will be 15 rounds in a standard-sized boxing ring. If you think there are some missing attributes, then you can post your own.

Pick One
-----------------
Ambidextrous/Can switch up
Orthodox
Southpaw

Pick One
-----------------
Boxer/Out-Fighter
Boxer-Puncher
Puncher-Boxer
Slugger
Swarmer

Pick a HW fighter that best resembles these qualities, but be realistic
-----------------------------------------------------------
Body Conditioning (How much the fighter can stay away from injury):
Chin:
Hand Speed:
Hands:
Height:
Footwork:
Length of Career (Swarmers don't last long, Sluggers stay in longer):
Quickness:
Reach:
Stamina:
Physical Strength (Ability to bully the opponents around the ring):
Toughness of Skin (Is the fighter prone to being cut):
Weight:

Pick a HW fighter that best resembles these qualities, but be realistic
------------------------------------------------------------
Accuracy (How often the punch is able to land):
Clinch Game (How they do when tied up):
Combinations:
Defensive Ability(Blocking, Parrying, Bobbing and Weaving, etc...):
Killer-Instinct:
Mental Toughness (Ability to overcome odds):
Punching to the Body (How often they do this):
Ring Control (Ability to give the opponent less room to work with):
Smarts/Savviness:
Work Rate:

Pick a HW fighter that best resembles these qualities, but be realistic
------------------------------------------------------------
Left Cross:
Left Hook:
Left Jab:
Left Uppercut:
Right Cross:
Right Hook:
Right Jab:
Right Uppercut:

m1kee50 · Post by **m1kee50** » 17 Sep 2007, 02:45

I dont think you have made it complicated enough

markl · Post by **markl** » 17 Sep 2007, 03:29

Butterbean for all 500 questions.

jezzamundo · Post by **jezzamundo** » 18 Sep 2007, 09:17

Orthodox

Boxer-Puncher

Body Conditioning: Rocky Marciano
Chin: Oliver McCall
Hand Speed: Mike Tyson
Hands: Mike Tyson
Height: Joe Louis
Footwork: Floyd Patterson
Length of Career: Turns pro aged 21 (after successful amateur career, wins world title aged 24, unifies titles aged 25, makes 3-4 defenses per year and retires aged 36, undefeated). Kinda like Joe Louis without the late comeback.
Quickness:
Reach: Joe Louis
Stamina: Rocky Marciano
Physical Strength: Evander Holyfield
Toughness of Skin: Muhammad Ali
Weight: Sonny Liston (naturally around 200lb when turning pro, grows to be around 220lb)

Accuracy: Joe Louis
Clinch Game: Evander Holyfield
Combinations: Jack Dempsey
Defensive Ability: Jack Johnson
Killer-Instinct: Joe Louis
Mental Toughness: Rocky Marciano
Punching to the Body: Joe Louis
Ring Control: Joe Louis
Smarts/Savviness: Muhammad Ali
Work Rate: Joe Louis

Left Cross: Larry Holmes
Left Hook: Joe Frazier
Left Jab: Sonny Liston
Left Uppercut: Mike Tyson
Right Cross: Rocky Marciano
Right Hook: Max Baer
Right Jab: Rarely thrown, so does it matter? Anyone!
Right Uppercut: Mike Tyson

'Rocket'Rigby · Post by **'Rocket'Rigby** » 18 Sep 2007, 14:41

Orthodox

Boxer-Puncher

Body Conditioning: Marciano
Chin: Marciano
Hand Speed: Ali
Hands: Louis
Height: Louis
Footwork: Charles
Length of Career: Frazier
Quickness: Patterson
Reach: Louis
Stamina: Marciano
Physical Strength: Tyson
Toughness of Skin: Ali
Weight: Frazier

Accuracy: Louis
Clinch Game: Marciano
Combinations: Charles
Defensive Ability: Charles
Killer-Instinct: Tyson
Mental Toughness: Marciano
Punching to the Body: Louis
Ring Control: Marciano
Smarts/Savviness: Ali
Work Rate: Marciano

Left Cross: Louis
Left Hook: Frazier
Left Jab: Holmes
Left Uppercut: Tyson
Right Cross: Marciano
Right Hook: Louis
Right Jab: N/A
Right Uppercut: Tyson

markl · Post by **markl** » 18 Sep 2007, 14:49

I rank louis as the greatest Heavyweight ever.

But why have both of you taken his height and reach?

Or do you mean Lewis?

'Rocket'Rigby · Post by **'Rocket'Rigby** » 18 Sep 2007, 15:35

markl wrote:I rank louis as the greatest Heavyweight ever.

But why have both of you taken his height and reach?

Or do you mean Lewis?

No Louis as in Joe Louis. It basically revolves around leverage. Joe Louis was 6'2, a decent height for Heavyweight. Well a heavyweight that can generate such power and snap in his punches (as Louis did) is therefore suited to his reach, as this allows him to hit his target. Lennox Lewis at just 3" taller was unable to apply the same leverage and that's why he didn't hit as hard.

If you are thinking, then why don't you have Louis's height and Lewis's reach, then the leverage (mathmatics) would not work.

markl · Post by **markl** » 18 Sep 2007, 17:54

Huh?

A 6'5 Joe Louis would have even more leverage. Louis had perfect punching technique and Lennox used his leverage and hit pretty hard in his own right.

So you have Joe Louis and I have a taller Joe Louis with longer arms. And you win why?

The thread is pretty silly to begin with. But you certainly added to the entertainment value.

I Feel Fine · Post by **I Feel Fine** » 18 Sep 2007, 18:56

I'll just say Joe Louis and leave it at that. He clearly was perfect...

'Rocket'Rigby · Post by **'Rocket'Rigby** » 19 Sep 2007, 11:01

markl wrote:Huh?

A 6'5 Joe Louis would have even more leverage. Louis had perfect punching technique and Lennox used his leverage and hit pretty hard in his own right.

So you have Joe Louis and I have a taller Joe Louis with longer arms. And you win why?

The thread is pretty silly to begin with. But you certainly added to the entertainment value.

You clearly have no concept as to how leverage works! Smaller fighters are naturally able to create more leverage, this is simply because a fighter that is generating power to punch upwards carries far more power than a taller fighter punching downwards. So a 3" taller Joe Louis will not be the same as the 3" smaller Joe Louis and he was pretty great, if not the greatest.

As far as enterainment, put your cock away and zip up you sick bastard and get your kicks somewhere else...

dempseyfire · Post by **dempseyfire** » 19 Sep 2007, 11:11

Decagon wrote:
'Rocket'Rigby wrote:No Louis as in Joe Louis. It basically revolves around leverage. Joe Louis was 6'2, a decent height for Heavyweight. Well a heavyweight that can generate such power and snap in his punches (as Louis did) is therefore suited to his reach, as this allows him to hit his target. Lennox Lewis at just 3" taller was unable to apply the same leverage and that's why he didn't hit as hard.
But Lewis's opponents were probably 3" taller than Louis's opponents, on average.

Tyson, Holyfield, Mercer, Morrison, Rahman, Tua, Botha, McCall . . all in the 5'10-6'2 range which was the norm for Louis's opponents.

Lennox had a few bigger opponents 6'4 Golota, 6'7 Grant, 6'7 Klitschko

Louis had 6'5 Carnera, 6'6 Baer, 6'4 Simon

markl · Post by **markl** » 19 Sep 2007, 13:58

'Rocket'Rigby wrote:
markl wrote:Huh?

A 6'5 Joe Louis would have even more leverage. Louis had perfect punching technique and Lennox used his leverage and hit pretty hard in his own right.

So you have Joe Louis and I have a taller Joe Louis with longer arms. And you win why?

The thread is pretty silly to begin with. But you certainly added to the entertainment value.
You clearly have no concept as to how leverage works! Smaller fighters are naturally able to create more leverage, this is simply because a fighter that is generating power to punch upwards carries far more power than a taller fighter punching downwards. So a 3" taller Joe Louis will not be the same as the 3" smaller Joe Louis and he was pretty great, if not the greatest.

As far as enterainment, put your cock away and zip up you sick bastard and get your kicks somewhere else...

You're a buffoon. Much more leverage is generated coming down. The height and angle is what generates the leverage. There is nothing in this world with more power going up then it has coming down.

What is the benefit of the shorter arms?

The whole thread was stupid. But you make it look like genius.

I sincerely doubt your dumb ass is even capable of zipping up your fly.

But I think you're in the running for the most retarded post of the year.

If you have the exact same skill set. The bigger man will win 99.99999/100.

This is like debating with Rain Man. Except you're all idiot and no savant.

Jaclem · Post by **Jaclem** » 20 Sep 2007, 00:34

..joe louis....ali's chin. that would do it.

markl · Post by **markl** » 20 Sep 2007, 01:21

Decagon wrote:
markl wrote:If you have the exact same skill set. The bigger man will win 99.99999/100.
That's just not true. Desire, motivation and other intangibles are what really determine who's going to win.

What I meant was all things being equal, including intangibles.

markl · Post by **markl** » 20 Sep 2007, 01:59

The whole thread is moot. There isn't a realistic thing about it. So i don't know why you're coming at me.

jezzamundo · Post by **jezzamundo** » 20 Sep 2007, 09:02

You're a buffoon. Much more leverage is generated coming down. The height and angle is what generates the leverage. There is nothing in this world with more power going up then it has coming down.

What is the benefit of the shorter arms?

The whole thread was stupid. But you make it look like genius.

I sincerely doubt your dumb ass is even capable of zipping up your fly.

But I think you're in the running for the most retarded post of the year.

Shorter arms are better for body punching and in-fighting in general. Marciano had a tiny reach, and used it to his advantage. I personally believe that a perfectly balanced, complete heavyweight would be around 6'2 and 220lb. Better still, if they originally fought as a middleweight in amateur competition (perhaps a world title), and grew to be a natural heavyweight.

m1kee50 · Post by **m1kee50** » 22 Sep 2007, 09:22

markl wrote:The whole thread is moot. There isn't a realistic thing about it. So i don't know why you're coming at me.

Introducing Decagon