BoxRec

Most would say power. What says you?

I think toughness might be the most overrated attribute in boxing because this is supposed to be a sport of defense more than offense.

I remember seeing pictures of boxers like Gus Lesnevich who had a flat nose and cauliflower ears, etc--- clearly a tough guy but generally speaking someone who looks like that is not the most skilled individual out there.

It's a bit more impressive to see someone get to a high level and not look like they've been through the mill. Of course toughness has carried a lot of people to the top, but I think it's one of those attributes that is either overrated or should be discouraged.

Either one by themselves aren't particularly useful. Power without good technique or accuracy means basically you're just hoping you get lucky. Toughness without much skill means you're gonna get beat the f*ck up, and just stay on your feet for the whole beating.

Combine those 2 assets and you've got a fairly dangerous guy.

I'd say it's probably between them 2 to be honest.

All things considered it'd probably be better to be tough than just a hard hitter with little else going for ya. Because you can teach a tough guy skill. Power hitters often tend to be so obsessed with the KO shot that they don't bother to learn anything else.

whats a tough guy gonna win with if he has nothing else?

if he has no stamina, he's not gonna outlast guys. if he has no power, he wont put a dent in them to come from behind. if he has no speed or accuracy, he aint gonna land much anyway

the power guy at least has the punchers chance, even if slim

S I Z E

dagosd2000 wrote: ↑13 Nov 2021, 02:45 S I Z E

Let's debate on that!

thoroughly, please!

eo has to go first!

his stance on that topic is far from irrefutable and his provided research lacks... may i say... in depth...ness!

Handspeed can be over-rated. Amir Khan is a good example. As fast as anyone with his hands but woefully lacking in other areas.
"Speed ain't shit unless you know what to do with it". - Roger Mayweather

When you are boxing at the highest level of competition, a deficiency in any attribute can be the difference between failure and success. I don't know how you can isolate which attribute is most or least important. You have to look at a fighter's whole package and compare it with that of the opponent he is facing. In addition, I think that the style a fighter chooses to employ can compensate for a deficiency which a fighter with a different style might find impossible to overcome.

Since circa 1992, it has been "size", with fans and journos alike extrapolating big heavyweights' results against mediocre heavyweights and assuming the same results would occur versus smaller but much higher quality opponents.

Usyk made a mockery of about three decades of received wisdom in his recent trouncing of Anthony Joshua!

Billy Tully wrote: ↑23 Nov 2021, 10:51 Since circa 1992, it has been "size", with fans and journos alike extrapolating big heavyweights' results against mediocre heavyweights and assuming the same results would occur versus smaller but much higher quality opponents.

Usyk made a mockery of about three decades of received wisdom in his recent trouncing of Anthony Joshua!

Btw I like your screen name. Fat City is probably the best boxing movie there ever was. Or at least the best boxing movie prior to the Rocky films. And I agree, size on its own is one of the more overrated aspects of boxing if not the most overrated.

HomicideHenry wrote: ↑28 Nov 2021, 08:55

Billy Tully wrote: ↑23 Nov 2021, 10:51 Since circa 1992, it has been "size", with fans and journos alike extrapolating big heavyweights' results against mediocre heavyweights and assuming the same results would occur versus smaller but much higher quality opponents.

Usyk made a mockery of about three decades of received wisdom in his recent trouncing of Anthony Joshua!

Btw I like your screen name. Fat City is probably the best boxing movie there ever was. Or at least the best boxing movie prior to the Rocky films. And I agree, size on its own is one of the more overrated aspects of boxing if not the most overrated.

Of course, it's better than Rocky, leave alone the remaining garbage of the franchise. I'd call it the best boxing movie indeed.

DrDuke wrote: ↑28 Nov 2021, 09:06

HomicideHenry wrote: ↑28 Nov 2021, 08:55

Billy Tully wrote: ↑23 Nov 2021, 10:51 Since circa 1992, it has been "size", with fans and journos alike extrapolating big heavyweights' results against mediocre heavyweights and assuming the same results would occur versus smaller but much higher quality opponents.

Usyk made a mockery of about three decades of received wisdom in his recent trouncing of Anthony Joshua!

Btw I like your screen name. Fat City is probably the best boxing movie there ever was. Or at least the best boxing movie prior to the Rocky films. And I agree, size on its own is one of the more overrated aspects of boxing if not the most overrated.

Of course, it's better than Rocky, leave alone the remaining garbage of the franchise. I'd call it the best boxing movie indeed.

What I like about Fat City is that it's really a film about the 99.99% of the business that never really makes it. It's a boxing movie about everybody else: tiersmen and journeymen.

Every other boxing movie I have ever seen has always been about champions or contenders, and never really about the real side of the business because it's the tiersmen and journeymen who are literally the skeleton holding up the entire business--- or at least that's the way it used to be in boxing.

HomicideHenry wrote: ↑28 Nov 2021, 09:14

DrDuke wrote: ↑28 Nov 2021, 09:06

HomicideHenry wrote: ↑28 Nov 2021, 08:55

Btw I like your screen name. Fat City is probably the best boxing movie there ever was. Or at least the best boxing movie prior to the Rocky films. And I agree, size on its own is one of the more overrated aspects of boxing if not the most overrated.

Of course, it's better than Rocky, leave alone the remaining garbage of the franchise. I'd call it the best boxing movie indeed.

What I like about Fat City is that it's really a film about the 99.99% of the business that never really makes it. It's a boxing movie about everybody else: tiersmen and journeymen.

Every other boxing movie I have ever seen has always been about champions or contenders, and never really about the real side of the business because it's the tiersmen and journeymen who are literally the skeleton holding up the entire business--- or at least that's the way it used to be in boxing.

Fat City also looks real, without extra-theatrics.