BoxRec

I touched upon this topic in another thread, but maybe it deserves it's own thread seeing as it it a massive topic of conversation encompassing practically every professional boxer in history.

Subjects like this will always be subjective - and let's try and refrain from the harsh statements gentlemen. Things flair up around here a little too much over the smallest details.

Just to give a quick explanation of what I mean - I mean if you could create a generic fighter without weaknesses, the most perfect fighting model you could make.

Which fighter(s) would be in the conversation?

I'll start the conversation off with the greatest all-around fighter I've ever seen: Sugar Ray Robinson.

Maybe it's the obvious place for this conversation to begin, but I do believe from all the guys that I've watched that Robinson as the most complete fighter in our sport as of yet.

I realise that others will disagree, as what has already happened on another thread:

elmersalsa wrote:I could find 10 boxers that were more complete than he was. It think the greats Charley Burley and Ezzard Charles were MORE COMPLETE

And I'll name a few others who I think were very well-rounded fighters: (apart from Ezzard Charles)

Joe Louis
Henry Armstrong
Jersey Joe Walcott
Archie Moore
Alexis Arguello
Wilfredo Gomez
Carlos Monzon
Evander Holyfield
Roy Jones Jr
Marco Antonio Barrera
Bernard Hopkins
Manny Pacquaio

Crease wrote:And I'll name a few others who I think were very well-rounded fighters: (apart from Ezzard Charles)

Joe Louis
Henry Armstrong
Jersey Joe Walcott
Archie Moore
Alexis Arguello
Wilfredo Gomez
Carlos Monzon
Evander Holyfield
Roy Jones Jr
Marco Antonio Barrera
Bernard Hopkins
Manny Pacquaio

Despite the fact Roy had more upside, I'd most certainly say James Toney was by far the more well rounded of the 2, and probably 3 if we're including B-Hop in the conversation.

I'd also say Ray Leonard has to be in this conversation and also Duran.

The great Sugar Ray Robinson was NEVER THE MOST COMPLETE FIGHTER EVER. He was complete for his time.

But he had some flaws:
He could not fight well inside.
He could not block punches.
Was not a great body puncher.

Ten fighters that were more complete than the great Sugar Ray Robinson in my view:
Ezzard Charles
Charley Burley
Sugar Ray Leonard
Roberto Duran
Mike McCallum
Salvador Sanchez
Eusebio Pedroza
Ismael Laguna
Miguel "Happy" Lora
Marvin Hagler

Robinson could not block punches? The lengths you'll take to support your stupid statements is almost admirable.

Ray Leonard at welter

Il Duce wrote:

Giancarlo wrote:

Giancarlo is like "Dingo Poop".

Just lays around and 'stinks' on the ground in the Northern Territory.

HEY WOAH.......Il Duce....you are at it AGAIN!!!!

Dingos live in Australia and Southeast Asia. Not exactly "Northern Territories"

Now.....if you are referring to the "northern most" areas of these very Southern places....I suppose we can overlook this bit of Dogshyt about Dogshyt. Or....you could just post some hyperlink sources to Home Depot that support your "facts".


Admit your error here and now, and let's not diminish the reputation of these noble canines any further with your ill informed comparisons.

elmersalsa wrote:Ten fighters that were more complete than the great Sugar Ray Robinson in my view:
Ezzard Charles
Charley Burley
Sugar Ray Leonard
Roberto Duran
Mike McCallum
Salvador Sanchez
Eusebio Pedroza
Ismael Laguna
Miguel "Happy" Lora
Marvin Hagler

Regarding Hagler - I did not put him on my list because in my estimation he was a much better offensive fighter than he was defensive - it tends to create an unbalanced fighter - though still a great one.

Crease wrote:

elmersalsa wrote:Ten fighters that were more complete than the great Sugar Ray Robinson in my view:
Ezzard Charles
Charley Burley
Sugar Ray Leonard
Roberto Duran
Mike McCallum
Salvador Sanchez
Eusebio Pedroza
Ismael Laguna
Miguel "Happy" Lora
Marvin Hagler

Regarding Hagler - I did not put him on my list because in my estimation he was a much better offensive fighter than he was defensive - it tends to create an unbalanced fighter - though still a great one.

I think Hagler was excellent defensively. Certainly a more complete fighter than Ismael Laguna.

Crease wrote:

elmersalsa wrote:Ten fighters that were more complete than the great Sugar Ray Robinson in my view:
Ezzard Charles
Charley Burley
Sugar Ray Leonard
Roberto Duran
Mike McCallum
Salvador Sanchez
Eusebio Pedroza
Ismael Laguna
Miguel "Happy" Lora
Marvin Hagler

Regarding Hagler - I did not put him on my list because in my estimation he was a much better offensive fighter than he was defensive - it tends to create an unbalanced fighter - though still a great one.

Like Duran and Leonard in a way, he was good defensively when he had to be.

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:Robinson could not block punches? The lengths you'll take to support your stupid statements is almost admirable.

I have seen his videos and he never blocked a punch.

Il Duce wrote:

Giancarlo wrote:

Giancarlo is like "Dingo Poop".

Just lays around and 'stinks' on the ground in the Northern Territory.

A good one from Il Dulce

elmersalsa wrote:

Il Duce wrote:

Giancarlo wrote:

Giancarlo is like "Dingo Poop".

Just lays around and 'stinks' on the ground in the Northern Territory.

A good one from Il Dulce

Elmo, are you attempting to overtake Il Duce for this years Most Stupid Poster award?

Crease wrote:

elmersalsa wrote:Ten fighters that were more complete than the great Sugar Ray Robinson in my view:
Ezzard Charles
Charley Burley
Sugar Ray Leonard
Roberto Duran
Mike McCallum
Salvador Sanchez
Eusebio Pedroza
Ismael Laguna
Miguel "Happy" Lora
Marvin Hagler

Regarding Hagler - I did not put him on my list because in my estimation he was a much better offensive fighter than he was defensive - it tends to create an unbalanced fighter - though still a great one.

Marvin was smooth as silk before getting screwed against Vito. Elmer got that one right.

elmersalsa wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:Robinson could not block punches? The lengths you'll take to support your stupid statements is almost admirable.

I have seen his videos and he never blocked a punch.

Coming from a guy who claimed Meldrick Taylor was one of the most complete fighter he'd seen....

Tomasino wrote:I think Hagler was excellent defensively.

He had strong arms, so when he pulled them in, they offered good protection for him, but when coming forward Marvin wasn't as defensively sound as he could have been.

Crease wrote:And I'll name a few others who I think were very well-rounded fighters:

Henry Armstrong

Armstrong was phenomenal at what he did, but I'm not sure I'd call him well rounded.

J-C wrote:Armstrong was phenomenal at what he did, but I'm not sure I'd call him well rounded.

He didn't have many weaknesses, mate.

Crease wrote:

Tomasino wrote:I think Hagler was excellent defensively.

He had strong arms, so when he pulled them in, they offered good protection for him, but when coming forward Marvin wasn't as defensively sound as he could have been.

Marvin had excellent footwork and also slipped punches very well when he wasn't in all out attack mode. He had great judgment of distance and timing.

Tomasino wrote:

Crease wrote:

Tomasino wrote:I think Hagler was excellent defensively.

He had strong arms, so when he pulled them in, they offered good protection for him, but when coming forward Marvin wasn't as defensively sound as he could have been.

Marvin had excellent footwork and also slipped punches very well when he wasn't in all out attack mode. He had great judgment of distance and timing.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TZHIo5ylQA8

He wasn't my favorite fighter, but this is my favorite HL video and the footwork at 2:07 is phenomenal. As good as any sequence you could ever see.

Ricardo Lopez could box at range, fight inside, defend well and had knockout power.

Ruben Olivares was just about complete, a marvelous boxer, fine tactician and crushing power - Olivares had a lovely jab and great attacking footwork.

The most complete though has to be Robinson, Burley, Charles or Duran.