BoxRec

Very high level fight. Charlo should be at 160. I thought Williams showed a lot of skill and I thought he was starting to get the better of Charlo until he ate that monster uppercut. It was a beauty of a fight while it lasted.

crusader wrote: There you go missing the point, again. NO ONE here is denying that he has good power;

Then why are we having this discussion? Charlo clearly hits hard at 154. Canelo didn't knock out Trout either and he sure as hell hits hard too. Who is a puncher at 154 if not these two?

but 'unreal' power suggests

You should know from having watched boxing long enough that not every fight features competitors intending to knock the other out cleanly. I can't speak on the Finney fight because I can't recall ever seeing it, and a cursory search of the internet suggests it was never televised, leaving me to guess that you haven't seen it either. I do know that fighters who desire making it to the final bell rather than winning more often than not do so. I assume you've learned that too, but I guess I shouldn't make assumptions about your overall competence.

Trout is an very good fighter and skilled boxer who, as previously stated, has never been KOed even when fighting a giant red guy who can crack. He beat Miguel Cotto. But again, he had a mediocre performance once, so he's "washed up" and Charlo should have KOed him to show that he's a bonafide puncher.

Then why are we having this discussion? Charlo clearly hits hard at 154. Canelo didn't knock out Trout either and he sure as hell hits hard too. Who is a puncher at 154 if not these two?

Why are you participating in the discussion? Before you posted in this thread, I noted that Charlo 'can obviously crack', and no one has suggested that he isn't a puncher. Did you not read the previous posts closely? If you did, why would you think that anyone was disputing Charlo being a banger? Why open with 'Jermall Charlo can punch', followed by a bunch of sarcastic nonsense about him going the distance? As has been the case before, you are going on and on trying to make a point that no one is contesting, and that can be seen even in the bit I've quoted above;

Charlo clearly hits hard at 154? No one has said otherwise in this thread and I acknowledged before you did that he can crack
Canelo hits hard? Yep, sure does
Who is a puncher at 154 if not them? They're both punchers bruh

If you're not being willfully obtuse, you are sorely lacking in reading comprehension skills. I'd hate to have that much trouble understanding things...

You should know from having watched boxing long enough that not every fight features competitors intending to knock the other out cleanly. I can't speak on the Finney fight because I can't recall ever seeing it, and a cursory search of the internet suggests it was never televised, leaving me to guess that you haven't seen it either. I do know that fighters who desire making it to the final bell rather than winning more often than not do so. I assume you've learned that too, but I guess I shouldn't make assumptions about your overall competence.

Trout is an very good fighter and skilled boxer who, as previously stated, has never been KOed even when fighting a giant red guy who can crack. He beat Miguel Cotto. But again, he had a mediocre performance once, so he's "washed up" and Charlo should have KOed him to show that he's a bonafide puncher.

I saw highlights of the Finney bout and have read various reports about it, and the unvarying impression is that Finney took a beating and was absorbing hard shots throughout the fight. Given how limited Finney is, as well as his other stoppage losses, it strikes me as unlikely that he would've stayed on his feet for ten lopsided rounds if Charlo were an absolutely monstrous hitter; the clubfighter simply wanting to survive doesn't cut it as an explanation.

Trout is a good boxer (in his peak performance Cotto hardly touched him), but he doesn't take a great shot and was put down by Canelo, Lara, and Daniel Dawson. As I stated, and as you probably failed to understand, Charlo not dropping or stopping him certainly doesn't mean that Jermall can't punch, but in a fight of that nature I imagine that Trout would've been visibly feeling the shots more if Jermall really had mindblowing power, the type where every shot is dangerous.

When an extraordinary ability is claimed, there is more room to be critical of a fighter's showings.

Trout was reluctant to truly engage with Charlo and it's why he lost. It's also why he wasn't knocked out. He was on the back foot a lot, trying to box. Williams was willing to plant his feet and try to exchange hard bombs and that's why he got knocked out. That's a dangerous style to employ with Jermall. He can bang. Unlike his brother. That's how you fight Jermell. Against Jermall you want to stay outside the pocket and try to pick him off from outside of range. Trout tried but was just eating the harder shots. Jermall is a very tough fighter. A fight with Canelo is a very good one. Andrade might be the guy to beat Jermall. He may have the style necessary. Long and rangy, good movement.

Finney wasn't planting his feet trying to rip Charlo's face off like Williams was. This is something very simple many fight fans fail to grasp. There's boxing to survive. And there's fighting to win. A guy can be in there and not appear to be running but also not truly trying to win.

Surviving isn't nearly that easy when you're getting hit repeatedly (your brain's still feeling it), especially if your opponent is actually a mindblowing puncher and you're a clubfighter without great durability. Hey clubfighters, as long as you don't plant your feet to throw you're sure to last with all murderous punchers that kick your ass! It's that simple!

That said, it is true that throwing aggresively can leave someone more susceptible to being hurt, and even unspectacular hitters can catch and stop opponents with shots they moved into or didnt see coming.

Jermall = a bonafide puncher, though yet to show he's an incredible one. How dare I suggest that!

crusader wrote:Surviving isn't nearly that easy when you're getting hit repeatedly (your brain's still feeling it), especially if your opponent is actually a mindblowing puncher and you're a clubfighter without great durability. Hey clubfighters, as long as you don't plant your feet to throw you're sure to last with all murderous punchers that kick your ass! It's that simple!

Keep your guard way up, don't throw punches, and spend lots of the bout running, and yeah, you can go long distances in fights. Even against murderous punchers, you can make it to the final bell depending on the desire of the opponent to finish you. At the highest level, you can see Roy Jones Jr. do exactly this against Antonio Tarver in their third fight and admit to it in the post fight interview, or go ahead and pick almost any Wladimir Klitschko fight. At the lower levels, it happens with incredible frequency. How many times have you seen a fight that ended up a shutout - 60-54/80-72/100-90 - where the opponent put in no effort to win? I can reel off a list of them a mile long.

I imagine that a very small portion of those cases involve clubfighters without good durability staying up and going the full 10 with world class, monstrous punchers who are busting them up all night. That's very different from being negative, but not getting hit often because you're so defensively minded.

Shots don't stop doing damage just because a fighter is in there to survive.

diddy wrote:Trout was reluctant to truly engage with Charlo and it's why he lost. It's also why he wasn't knocked out. He was on the back foot a lot, trying to box. Williams was willing to plant his feet and try to exchange hard bombs and that's why he got knocked out. That's a dangerous style to employ with Jermall. He can bang. Unlike his brother. That's how you fight Jermell. Against Jermall you want to stay outside the pocket and try to pick him off from outside of range. Trout tried but was just eating the harder shots. Jermall is a very tough fighter. A fight with Canelo is a very good one. Andrade might be the guy to beat Jermall. He may have the style necessary. Long and rangy, good movement.

More importantly, Williams didn't see the punch coming, as he hasn't fought anybody nearly as skilled as Charlo. Trout saw all the punches, because he fought defensively and he is a better boxer than Williams.

crusader wrote:I imagine that a very small portion of those cases involve clubfighters without good durability staying up and going the full 10 with world class, monstrous punchers who are busting them up all night. That's very different from being negative, but not getting hit often because you're so defensively minded.

If you're going to limit big punchers to an extremely small sample size, then perhaps. There's not a lot of Edwin Valeros in history. There's a whole lot of Klimov/Crawford and Victor Ortiz/Nate Campbell type fights though. There's actually more of them in the historical record than in the modern one too.