What's the difference between a slick and skilled boxer?

To me, slick means a tricky defense, maybe slightly unconventional, especially a lot of slipping of punches. Like Whitaker, PBF, Toney, Hopkins. Skilled boxer just means someone who has a good jab, movement all the conventional stuff. Really I think a defense style based on slipping and shoulder roll is pretty much what I call slick. Some guys like a younger Kostya or Vitali slip shots with their hands low as well but their overall body movement isnt as dramatic, so I wouldnt call it slick. Whitaker or Ali standing right infront of their opponent and slipping a 3-5 punch combination with their hands down is the definition of slick.

I keep hearing about boxers who are slick such as Chad Dawson, Eddie Chambers, Joan Guzman, but they also very skilled. What's the difference between those three boxers to someone like Wladimir Klitschko and Bernard Hopkins who are skilled, but not slick. slick = defensive style but not the peekaboo style skilled = can refer to offense or defense

I keep hearing about boxers who are slick such as Chad Dawson, Eddie Chambers, Joan Guzman, but they also very skilled. What's the difference between those three boxers to someone like Wladimir Klitschko and Bernard Hopkins who are skilled, but not slick. BHOP falls under the slick category

Bernard Hopkins is NOT slick. He's probably one of the most technical fighters today. He uses his brain to execute his game plan (pun). lol if u can't recognize BHop as having slickness in his game, then u need to log off and read a book or something.

Joe Louis, Alexis Arguello, Ricardo Lopez, Thomas Hearns, Buddy McGirt, Mike McCallum, Lennox Lewis....all skilled fighters, not necessarily slick. Locche, Whitaker, Benitez, Spinks, Calderon, Mayweather, Toney, Everett, Camacho....slick and skilled fighters. Yeah. It's also based on the type of fighter you are. A guy like Hearns or Marquez are very skilled. Their game is still based their offense for the large part though. Marquez was more slick years ago than he is now because he has increased his offensive output. A guy that bases his game off defense alone to win ie. Locche, Calderon, Mayweather at times, is more slick. They have the ability to slide to an angle just out of reach and shoot a counter shot and then be gone before the other guy come back. It's about the type of fight you fight. Whitaker, Pep and Locche were the classic slick fighters. They would slip under you and go through your damn legs without you even knowing. Guzman is also hideously slick. A guy like Curry was highly skilled. As skilled as the above, but he was not really slippery and slick per se. It was more about being in perfect position, having a tight defense and timing and shooting off counters from that. You really could say one is more natural talent on top of the fundamentals and the other is more learning of fundamentals. That doesn't tell the whole story though. Most often though, the real slippery, slick guys were the ones with the most natural talent and put that on top of their basics.

Slick makes me think of a boxer who's primary goal is limit contact and win a low contact bout. The way Mayweather fought against Hatton was slick... he used a ton of movement early until Hatton started to wear down, and then he started opening up to really create his own offense in a big way. Regardless of what he was doing, he was making sure contact was limited. Timothy Bradley is another one. He is a jab dependent fighter who throws the right hand as his main power punch, because it harder to counter than the left hook. He moves a fair bit, and generally tries to avoid contact. Bradley is slick. Erik Morales fights the same way as Bradley, but the last thing he tries to do is avoid contact. He is jab dependent and throws the right hand as his primary power punch. No one would ever accuse Morales of being slick. All three of these guys are skilled. Boxing skill as a term translates into fundamentally sound... jab dependent, straight punches, can grind out decisions if needed, etc. Slick and skilled are not mutually exclusive... it is common that a slick fighter is skilled, but a skilled fighter does not have to be skilled. I hope that jives with what most people think on the subject. EDIT: Skilled, in my mind, has actually transformed, starting with the Vazquez-Marquez trilogy. Neither of those guys really fought in a jab dependent way or anything like that. Basically skill in boxing is operating in a way that is hard to beat and has the ability to beat a lot of boxers with. For instance, Gatti and Ward were not overly skilled, because their mindless brawling would be solved by many more skilled fighters, but you aren't going to get in the ring and easily outslick Vazquez or Marquez. You are going to have to find a way to match their skill level in order to get the better of them. Operating by the boxing textbook, regardless of what way you fight is considered skilled I think.

some people need to look up the definition of slick cause some of u couldnt be anymore wrong. slick is not confined to reflexes and speed - its trickery and slyness - like a BHop reading Trinidad's footwork and movement to dismantle him - or Mayweathers timed check left hook to Hatton. Basically being able to sneak in that punch the other guy doesnt see coming, and shoulder rolling and slipping out out of trouble. slick and skill are not mutually exclusive

Bhop is the definition of slick

I keep hearing about boxers who are slick such as Chad Dawson, Eddie Chambers, Joan Guzman, but they also very skilled. What's the difference between those three boxers to someone like Wladimir Klitschko and Bernard Hopkins who are skilled, but not slick. Bernard is very slick. Slick has to do with deceit, and subtle movements, often defensively. Wlad is a great example of a really skillful Boxer who isnt very slick.

yes, i agree with the explanation. The main thing , is good to be both..:) ______________________________ sell iphone penedes

Joe Louis, Alexis Arguello, Ricardo Lopez, Thomas Hearns, Buddy McGirt, Mike McCallum, Lennox Lewis....all skilled fighters, not necessarily slick. Locche, Whitaker, Benitez, Spinks, Calderon, Mayweather, Toney, Everett, Camacho....slick and skilled fighters.

I see it as....... Slick Boxers - Boxers who have a tight defense. They slip, bob and weave alot. (Pernell, Toney, Floyd) Skilled Boxer - Boxers who use footwork and speed as defense. (Ray Leonard, Meldrick Taylor) Ray Leonard's speed was his defense, where someone like Floyd, catch, roll and slip punches. I hope that makes sense cause I'm confusing myself lol :thinking: You don't have to think about it that much, lol.

I was thinking more of smoothness, Chad Dawson with five punch combinations, Eddie Chambers with his unique boxing style, and Joan Guzman who is very smooth when he's on the offense.

I always think for a fighter to be described as slick you gotta have great movement, speed and reflexes. So someone like V Klitschko is obviously very skilled but due to the fact that he's relatively robotic etc he's not slick. It's not mutually exclusive however.

Slick = Natural ability Skilled = Technical Ability & Natural Ability I was thinking... Slick=Natural + Technical and Skilled=Technical alone

I keep hearing about boxers who are slick such as Chad Dawson, Eddie Chambers, Joan Guzman, but they also very skilled. What's the difference between those three boxers to someone like Wladimir Klitschko and Bernard Hopkins who are skilled, but not slick. Slick = Natural ability Skilled = Technical Ability & Natural Ability