Who was the most technically sound boxer to lace up gloves?

^^ The thing that sucks about amateurs though, is that you can't utilize a defence like Mayweathers as successfully as in the pro's. For every punch that hits your body when doing the shoulder-roll, there's always a judge who gives him points. Excellent post, BennyST Yes, absolutely. Thats why so many unorthodox fighters don't do too well in the ams. If you're a power puncher or body punching brawler you will generally get beaten by a classic boxer who fights behind a constant jab and throws constant flurries and 1-2's. All those jabs get counted whereas in the pro ranks they might not mean much if you've got a guy with power who is busting you up with every punch he lands. Amateur boxing needs an overhaul. I guess it's just hard to find the best way of doing things.

I have to say, just pure boxing skills, it's Pernell Whitaker.. Yes. He is undoubtedly the most skilled fighter I've ever seen. Never pay again for live sex! | Hot girls doing naughty stuff for free! | Chat for free!

^^ The thing that sucks about amateurs though, is that you can't utilize a defence like Mayweathers as successfully as in the pro's. For every punch that hits your body when doing the shoulder-roll, there's always a judge who gives him points. Excellent post, BennyST

RiZOOM: That video is great! Thats one of my favourite fights. The last combination he throws before Nady steps in is one of the sweetest things I've seen. Right to the body, right uppercut. Left to the body, left uppercut! Pure poetry! One of the most beautiful pieces of boxing I've ever seen. I think people are mixing great boxers that are unorthodox with straight up textbook boxing. A guy like Mayweather, Whitaker etc does not really equal textbook boxing. They throw their punches perfectly and do everything perfectly but that does not equal textbook style boxing. Textbook really would be a Winky Wright style. Hands up covering your face with your elbows tucked in, always leading with the jab, never putting yourself off balance with any punch, always keeping yourself covered when throwing any punch, throwing out a punch then snapping it back into the perfect position, never lunging in with a punch, always throwing with the proper footwork, etc etc. Mayweather throws everything perfectly but is not a textbook fighter. Each punch is textbook perfect but the whole package is not. Same with Whitaker. Textbook is all the simple basics put together perfectly which is why Wright is probably the best choice. To be textbook you do not need a wide range of skills, all you need are the basic fundamentals and to do each one perfectly. That is what Wright does. He is much more textbook than either Mayweather or Whitaker. Even Mayweathers defense is not textbook. If it was textbook everyone would learn it and be doing it in the amateurs. Textbook is what everyone learns from the first time they go boxing. If you box with those basic fundamentals perfectly then you are a textbook perfect boxer.

winky has to be a unanimous decision because he was not blessed with all the athletic talent that all of the above floyd maywether(especially this guy), roy jones, pernell whitaker etc... BUT he is so technically sound and does not put him self in a predictment to get hit alot it just looks like a beauty to me i dont know bout yall calling him boring because his boxing skills are so far superior than the norm champion who probably relies on athletism or power take your pick

there are so many different styles of boxing taught, you cant judge one style as "pure" over another. The most technically sound boxer is the one with the least stylistic flaws, defensively and offensively. Floyd always keeps his hands up, has a good, accurate jab, and can use every punch effectively. His only flaw I would say is forgoing head movement, but he is also one of the all time great defensive fighters, so what do I know. Hmmm, I have always heard technically sound and pure boxer related to how slick a fighter is. I guess once again, a lack of a clear definition of nebulous terms gets in the way of us agreeing.

I think Juan Diaz is definitely textbook

dont apologize, were all entitled to opinions.. im sticking with mine.. who can outbox sweat pea? i cant think of anyone Right but that does not mean he was the most technically sound boxer.

i dunt know man. i still think sweet pea was just a pure boxer.. ducking, and dipping.. he had a good arsenal and a great jab.. in the JCC fight, it was masterful, like he would literally just box circles around JCC.. i guess i can agree with the posters that said he was awkward.. sweet pea is one of the most skillful, pure boxers out there, but he was not what one would consider technically sound. he was extremly unorthodox.

No, but I do think that throwing the jab fairly frequently (which Floyd does not do) is at the center of being a pure boxer. Just because Jones was able to throw every punch in the book doesn't make him a boxer I don't think. Fighting by the textbook is what makes you a pure boxer IMO, and leading with shots other than the jab just because you are quick enough to do so goes against that I think. Also, it's not like being a pure boxer is necessarily a good thing. Hell, Floyd and Roy might be better off because they can forego the jab and just lead with power punches, who knows? there are so many different styles of boxing taught, you cant judge one style as "pure" over another. The most technically sound boxer is the one with the least stylistic flaws, defensively and offensively. Floyd always keeps his hands up, has a good, accurate jab, and can use every punch effectively. His only flaw I would say is forgoing head movement, but he is also one of the all time great defensive fighters, so what do I know.

...is the opposite of a technically sound boxer.:D I think Ricardo Mayorga is actually the opposite of a technically sound boxer, but that is just me.

being able to throw any punch at any time sounds like a pure boxer to me. You make it sound like you have to NOT be able to do things to be a pure boxer. No, but I do think that throwing the jab fairly frequently (which Floyd does not do) is at the center of being a pure boxer. Just because Jones was able to throw every punch in the book doesn't make him a boxer I don't think. Fighting by the textbook is what makes you a pure boxer IMO, and leading with shots other than the jab just because you are quick enough to do so goes against that I think. Also, it's not like being a pure boxer is necessarily a good thing. Hell, Floyd and Roy might be better off because they can forego the jab and just lead with power punches, who knows?

George Foreman:fing02:

The best I have seen must have been the cuban stand-out, Hernandez. Don't quite remember the first name, think it was Ariel..? And Kostya Tszyu in the amateurs, before he fell in love with his power. There has been alot of german fighters with technically sound styles, straight up text-book kind of fighters.

The guy does not box behind his jab for the most part. Guys who lead with left hooks are not pure boxers. being able to throw any punch at any time sounds like a pure boxer to me. You make it sound like you have to NOT be able to do things to be a pure boxer.

my bad. misunderstood question.. I'll go with Felix Sturm dont apologize, were all entitled to opinions.. im sticking with mine.. who can outbox sweat pea? i cant think of anyone

Not to offend, but you must have a warped opinion on what a technically sound fighter is. my bad. misunderstood question.. I'll go with Felix Sturm

Floyd Mayweather, not cuz i'm a fan or anything Floyd Mayweather, if you ignore the cheating with the elbows. The guy does not box behind his jab for the most part. Guys who lead with left hooks are not pure boxers.

John David Jackson was pretty slick himself. Jab jab jab straight left, etc.

Floyd Mayweather, if you ignore the cheating with the elbows.