BoxRec

...where you would favour a guy who had inferior offense and defense to his rival?

Maybe Holyfield-Tyson? What others?

Prime McCall - Wlad?

Jaywheel wrote:Prime McCall - Wlad?

Its harder than you think, considering all the other variables which go into making a great boxer.

Wlad is probably a go-to man here. Very impressive power and good jab, fights quite defensively, remains quite beatable.

Goodnight, Irene wrote:

Jaywheel wrote:Prime McCall - Wlad?

Its harder than you think, considering all the other variables which go into making a great boxer.

Wlad is probably a go-to man here. Very impressive power and good jab, fights quite defensively, remains quite beatable.

He's the first one I could come up with. Finding the opponent to favour is hard. Good scratcher of a thread.

Terry Norris may be another resource here. Very good defensively (when he chose to be), and a powerhouse in attack, but he certainly could be gotten to.

Maybe Norris-Trinidad is another?

Good thread idea,

Maybe Vernon Forrest over Shane Mosely is an example.

J-C wrote:Good thread idea,

Maybe Vernon Forrest over Shane Mosely is an example.

I mean fantasy matches.

Goodnight, Irene wrote:

J-C wrote:Good thread idea,

Maybe Vernon Forrest over Shane Mosely is an example.

I mean fantasy matches.

I though you meant actual and fantasy, due to the Holyfield Tyson reference.

Sorry dawg.

Yeah, sorry for the confusion, when I mentioned Holyfield-Tyson I was thinking them fighting at their best.

Actual fight: Marciano-Charles

Goodnight, Irene wrote:...where you would favour a guy who had inferior offense and defense to his rival?

Maybe Holyfield-Tyson? What others?

Evander had inferior power, his combination punching held a backseat to no heavyweight.

Power is a big part of offense --- its included as much as technique (where Tyson did not lack), and Tyson was immeasurably stronger than Holyfield in this regard. His hands were quicker, too.

Overall, Id say Tyson was pretty clearly superior offensively and defensively to Holyfield.

I doubt he was faster, no doubt he punches harder. But he had no Ring IQ, Evander was always in position to punch and could think and vary his offense. I'm not saying you're wrong, but there was nothing clear about it.

Tyson is immensely overrated defensively, but he was harder to hit than Holyfield.

Neither man had much of a ring IQ. Holyfield's was better --- but ring IQ is not being tested here.

Your last line, Id agree with to a word. Tyson gets too much credit defensively, but Holyfield seemed almost to enjoy eating punches.

Can you come up with a fantasy fight where youd favour the inferior guy in each of these categories, Saad?

Goodnight, Irene wrote:Neither man had much of a ring IQ. Holyfield's was better --- but ring IQ is not being tested here.

Your last line, Id agree with to a word. Tyson gets too much credit defensively, but Holyfield seemed almost to enjoy eating punches.

Can you come up with a fantasy fight where youd favour the inferior guy in each of these categories, Saad?

I'll think over it later, I'm too immersed in Tyson/Holyfield at the moment. The Ring IQ does come into play here. Mike had combos called out from his corner, he had no thought process in the ring and that's why he was more than happy to fall into a clinch inside where he should have been a monster.

Why wouldn't that matter? While I'll grant you Mike's physical gifts and power. Holyfield was probably better inside, mid-range & outside.

My equation/blueprint would be...

Answer = Great offence and defence with a dodgy chin versus an inferior fighter with a steel chin and a decent punch.

A match up that comes to mind...

Ingo-Paterson?
Hearns-Barkley?

Paterson could be KO'd by inferior fighters? Perhaps?

Tiger Flowers? A great fighter who could be KO'd?

Marvin Hagler vs Roy Jones jnr.

I'm struggling with this as I consider punch resistance part of defence. I know defence and chin are reliant on each other and not the same, but I can't think of defence without considering those subtle head movements that allow a fighter to ride a punch.

DaveBoyMorrison wrote:Marvin Hagler vs Roy Jones jnr.

you'd favor RJJ?

Hagler is better and wins.

Jaywheel wrote:

DaveBoyMorrison wrote:Marvin Hagler vs Roy Jones jnr.

you'd favor RJJ?

No I think Hagler destroys him however I'd say RJJ was quicker, had better defense and was a bit more of a puncher.

The above is certainly a fair debate on Dave's part.

Why thank you. Its quite a difficult OP to answer.

What about Armstrong v Duran, in which I favour Hank?

Another possible one, yes.

Like I said, considering the large number of variables going into what we often ascribe to greatness, it seems 99 guys out of 100 wont overcome deficits in these two categories simultaneously.

Jaywheel wrote:

DaveBoyMorrison wrote:Marvin Hagler vs Roy Jones jnr.

you'd favor RJJ?

Read out Elmer's list to us!!!