Page 2 of 2
Posted: 17 Apr 2008, 18:35
by STP
Eubank had a good left hook. But sometimes slapped with it.
Posted: 17 Apr 2008, 22:07
by STP
fist wrote:Eubank I think was hugely technical, he is obsessive when it comes to the complex skills, movements and strategies employed in boxing. He was obsessed with practising over and over again. As someone one a thread said the other day, when he sparred, he didnt like to go at it, but preferred to use the experience to refine his technique.
Reading Eubank's book (that he ended up writing himself without a ghost writer, every word), it's quite clear he has severe OCD (Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder).
Posted: 18 Apr 2008, 05:37
by Southpaw Stylist
MatthewS wrote:what is the max age for an Olypic Amatuer fighter? is it a worldwide limit or do different countries do it at different ages?
34 years of age. International rule.
Posted: 18 Apr 2008, 05:39
by Southpaw Stylist
stujones wrote:Short answer is yes,
John Murray takes to many shots for my liking also.
Look what happend when one of our supposed better technitions... Richard Williams.... stepped up to fight Martinez, looked so outclassed that Adam Smith started mentioning a re-occurance of a mystery illness.
Look at how America developed Adrian Stone.
I still believe that fighters like Joe Calzaghe and Steve Robinson would have benefited further when training in the states.
For me alot of the problem is, although I don't know what it is like other countries, but we rush our very young school boy Am's into actual fights... and coaches like to take their time over those that have turned up to the gym for the first time at say 15.
Develops that "be first" mentality, and its just the physically strong ones will come through. The later bloomer 12 year old will quit.
Seeing clips of Hatton and Calzaghe as very young fighters - they just look like more refined versions of themselves now. All about throwing as many punches as possible and physical strength.
Very true.
Posted: 18 Apr 2008, 05:58
by DavidPayne
Was Jeff Lacy technically superior or prepared through combat for his shot at Calzaghe?
Its all about individuals. I will say that fewer fighters are pampered in the States. Its a bigger field to get to the top of and you cant afford to play in the minors for too long because you simply dont get noticed. But to generalise is ridiculous. Was Brewster more technically correct than Harrison, would it matter in the ring?
There were some truths about European fighters only fighting worn out Americans like Brewer etc. Rather than the prime fighters. But I think its simply stupid to say American fighters are better full stop.
Nonsense.
Posted: 18 Apr 2008, 17:34
by Loftgroov
I think the coaching is technically superior in the USA. There are exceptions - but all told...they seem to be more slick in the States.