BoxRec

I know that this is generally a bad match-up of styles for the swarmer types, but can some of you cite some examples where the swarmer won?

Willard and Firpo were punchers Dempsey swarmed all over.

Marciano suffocated Layne and a few others.

Castillo KO'd Corrales.

You'd probably find more instances below HW, where size is regulated. Chavez has to have beaten a couple?

How about Armstrong beating everybody and anything that moved?

Frazier modeled himself on Armstrong.

I suppose Kostya Tszyu was more of a boxer-puncher than a pure slugger (although he had huge pop in his right hand), but he certainly had more success when he had room to swing against speedy boxers, than when faced with the swarming, volume punching Hatton.

Would anyone accpet Chavez versus Rosario and Ramirez?

Ezzard wrote:Would anyone accpet Chavez versus Rosario and Ramirez?

When I mentioned Chavez, I was thinking of citing Rosario, but wanted to give him a little more cred than simply being a slugger.

Certainly is an example of a swarmer beating one hell of a puncher, though (and how!).

The problem with categorising fighters is that a fighter could be classified into two different groups. For example;

Rocky Marciano - well he is normally entered as a "swarmer", he could very easily be rated as a "slugger"...
And the same can be said for Jack Dempsey, Mike Tyson or Joe Frazier.

And in the case of Muhammad Ali - I've seen him classfied in the skill category but he could be put into the speed one just as well.

Because of these distinctions, it makes these types of topics pretty hard to judge.

Jung-Koo Chang whooped up on German Torres twice.

Aaron Pryor's fights with Alexis Arguello would be some of the more obvious choices.

Vuyani Bungu beat a big right hand hitter in Kennedy McKinney twice.

Baby Jake Matlala ate Michael Carbajal up.

Arguello was not a slugger. He was a boxer-puncher.

Calzaghe vs Lacy and Kessler.

Tyson beat Ruddock, and Smith before that.

I would argue there aren't many true 'sluggers' at the elite level of boxing b/c they tend to not get that high up the totem pole. The likes of Ricardo Mayorga are an exception. But someone like a Peter McNeeley is a classic example of a 'slugger' style in my book . . just walk in and throw bombs with little pretense for science or defense.

dempseyfire wrote:I would argue there aren't many true 'sluggers' at the elite level of boxing b/c they tend to not get that high up the totem pole. The likes of Ricardo Mayorga are an exception. But someone like a Peter McNeeley is a classic example of a 'slugger' style in my book . . just walk in and throw bombs with little pretense for science or defense.

Well, maybe I should have used the term "puncher". I have also seen the term "boxer-puncher".

I certainly didn't mean a McNeeley type.

What term would you apply to '73 Foreman? Seems to me he wasn't too far removed from a "slugger" at that stage.

How about Louis and Liston? "puncher", maybe even "boxer-puncher"?

Would SRR be considered the prototype "boxer-puncher"?

How about Archie Moore?

I have always distinguished between slugger and boxer-puncher, personally.

Foreman was a slugger. Mayorga and Trinidad, too. Louis, Arguello, and arguably Liston too, were all boxer-punchers.

Obviously, you will create more examples by widening the net to include any aggressive, power-hitting fighter (Chavez-Rosario, Pryor-Arguello, Frazier-Bonavena, etc.).

Would Jerry Quarry best be described as a "boxer-puncher"?

Styles aside, Im not sure Quarry had the power to be a good example here.

Goodnight, Irene wrote:Styles aside, Im not sure Quarry had the power to be a good example here.

Jack Bodell kindly disagrees.

The guy could punch, yes, but he wasnt really a slugger in style, and he didnt have the power to really be one.

More of a counter-puncher, albeit an aggressive one.

Goodnight, Irene wrote:The guy could punch, yes, but he wasnt really a slugger in style, and he didnt have the power to really be one.

More of a counter-puncher, albeit an aggressive one.

Definitely agree that Quarry would not be considered a "slugger".

If you widen the net to include all aggressive punchers, as I say, youll catch more fish (ultimately itll always be the exception, though).

As Saad says of Foreman, grit and a punch werent enough, no matter how apparent. Walking to him was death.

Goodnight, Irene wrote:Arguello was not a slugger. He was a boxer-puncher.

I was just naming punchers that got beat by swarmers, not necessarily sluggers. Some choices were better than others.

Arguello was certainly a puncher, thats true.

Goodnight, Irene wrote:If you widen the net to include all aggressive punchers, as I say, youll catch more fish (ultimately itll always be the exception, though).

As Saad says of Foreman, grit and a punch werent enough, no matter how apparent. Walking to him was death.

Could someone who was a top finisher... A Tyson or Dempsey not do a "Ron Lyle" on him and then close the show?

Only askin'...

Ezzard wrote:

Goodnight, Irene wrote:If you widen the net to include all aggressive punchers, as I say, youll catch more fish (ultimately itll always be the exception, though).

As Saad says of Foreman, grit and a punch werent enough, no matter how apparent. Walking to him was death.

Could someone who was a top finisher... A Tyson or Dempsey not do a "Ron Lyle" on him and then close the show?

Only askin'...

COULD they? Yes. The two men you cite were so much quicker than Foreman, and certainly had the punch to hurt him very rapidly...Foreman was tough --- he had a chin, and he showed a tonne of heart in that Lyle bout, but he was not immune to what Dempsey or Tyson could unload.

However...

I really believe Foreman is NOT the same guy post-Zaire --- compounded by this having been his very first bout back. He was cautious and leary, and Lyle went right to it. Dempsey and Tyson were better than Lyle, but Foreman, even then, was too. And his pre-Zaire confidence and activity returned to him, I dont believe Lyle competes the way he did. Of course, I cant be sure of that, but watching Dempsey and Tyson both, I do not find it hard to believe Foreman bulldozes them backward, and if he can back these guys up (especially Tyson), something he has all the tools to do so (the punch, the range, the brute strength, the intensity), I have to favour Foreman and favour him big.

It's a fair argument. But pre/post Zaire does open you up to pre/post Robin Givens type discussions.