Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

More skilled: Ricardo Lopez or Harold Johnson

Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • More skilled: Ricardo Lopez or Harold Johnson

    Both Lopez and Johnson were very textbook and classy boxer-punchers. They're also one of the most skilled technicians in the game, possessing a perfect, non-flashy boxing style. In your opinion who do you think had better boxing skills and ability?
    So hard for me to choose between the 2 since they're both so aesthetically pleasing to watch. Both define the term 'sweet science'.
    Last edited by Flo_Raiden; 11-19-2014, 10:47 AM.

  • #2
    From what I've seen, due to the level of his competitive I would probably go for Johnson.

    If I had to exchange places in the ring with one of them, Ricardo Lopez.

    But if I had to pick one career, Harold Johnson.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by joeandthebums View Post
      From what I've seen, due to the level of his competitive I would probably go for Johnson.

      If I had to exchange places in the ring with one of them, Ricardo Lopez.

      But if I had to pick one career, Harold Johnson.
      I'm thinking along the same lines.

      Johnson fought opponents of a much higher standard than Lopez. It's not even close.

      But judged purely on skill then there's little to choose between the 2.

      Comment


      • #4
        I think Johnson by far.

        Much more well rounded, performed at a much higher level like others have stated.

        Johnson could do anything in the ring.

        Comment


        • #5
          Since I am of the notion - right or wrong - that if you seeks to have as balanced view as possible, the level of competition must be taken into account when trying to assess exactly how skillful a fighter truly is - at least to some degree.

          Based on that, I give the edge to Johnson. Quite clearly, I might add. Although Lopez is nigh on flawless from his preferred distance, I regard Johnson as a bit more complete and with a slightly more diverse toolbox to draw from.

          What, for me, topples Lopez is his comparatively weak inside-game. His huge physical advantages for the weight and superior talent meant he was never really forced to put one to use - he usually just clinched, awaited the referee to break them up and returned to his comfort-zone the relatively few times it occurred. Whether it was due to sheer unwillingness or plain inability is up for debate, but his showings against Alvarez - the best and strongest fighter he met throughout his career - makes me hesitate how he would fare against the elite swarmers and pressure fighters the 108 and 112lbs division has to offer.

          Lopez was admittedly past his prime when those bouts took place - not as far gone as some want you to believe though, in my opinion - but this is exactly why a bout with Chang is so thrilling to fantasize about. He presents all the difficulties Alvarez did, but to an even greater extent.

          In comparison, Johnson has never made me hesitant in the same manner. Actually, I view him pretty much as the consummate technician. He has shown himself capable at every distance against much, much sterner competition - therefore, he fits my criteria better.

          Both of them are geniuses, but as I said before - I'll side with the more proven one.

          Comment


          • #6
            Bump. Would like to hear more thoughts on this comparison. Both are one of my favorite boxing technicians.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by IronDanHamza View Post
              I think Johnson by far.

              Much more well rounded, performed at a much higher level like others have stated.

              Johnson could do anything in the ring.
              - -Except beat Archie!

              Insert he finally beat Arch after scores of rds getting beat up, knocked down, or knocked out.

              OP made a nonesensical fire to water comparison.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by QueensburyRules View Post
                - -Except beat Archie!

                Insert he finally beat Arch after scores of rds getting beat up, knocked down, or knocked out.

                OP made a nonesensical fire to water comparison.
                Oh I'm sorry, was there anything wrong with the comparison between 2 solid fighters?

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Flo_Raiden View Post
                  Oh I'm sorry, was there anything wrong with the comparison between 2 solid fighters?
                  Its a great thread... Ignore haters. Green is one of my favorite posters here and have not heard from him in a while. This bumped thread captured some of his thoughts on this comparison which mirror mine as well. I just cannot add to his summary except perhaps to say that even in an era where fighters were expected to be able to do a lot of things, Washington stood out.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Flo_Raiden View Post
                    Oh I'm sorry, was there anything wrong with the comparison between 2 solid fighters?
                    - -Yup

                    Harold was in the greatest era of LHs. Never been a great era of 100lbers because the demographic is too small...Duh!

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X
                    TOP