Greatest fighters with the fewest dimensions, name them

At his best, I can't think of many fighters he (George Foreman) wouldn't have walked through. The question is why would he fight any other way than he did? The only guy who beat him in his prime is himself against Ali (one of the best ever). I mean, if the guy tried to box he'd be an idiot. That's like asking Paulie to scrap and go in there like Tyson.

What you're saying is Pac can't fight at close range, on the inside. He can absolutely fight going backwards. I understand that infighting has it's own category but Bradley in many instances didn't allow Pacquiao to maintain his mid range distance, he did so all whilst backing Pacquiao up and offensively Pacquiao couldn't get off. Morales did the same but was far more successful at doing it. That still puts into question how well Pacquiao can fight going backwards.

I think you and a couple of other people have it confused. When Pacquiao can't maintain mid range distance, you see far more of an inability to fight going backwards, Morales 1 and much of the Bradley rematch to name a few. It's easy for Pacquiao to maintain mid range distance whilst going backwards and then build momentum coming forward against the likes of Margarito and Rios. What you're saying is Pac can't fight at close range, on the inside. He can absolutely fight going backwards.

I don't believe that any great fighter is limited. In fact there is nothing limited about a great fighter. They might be more specialized in one area of fighting but that does not mean that they're limited. They possess and utilize many things that takes them to the top - that takes them above and beyond the rest!!! They have the heart, the drive, the courage, the desire, the emotions, the grit, among many other things! You see! They can't be limited because within themselves (WITHIN ALL OF US!) is the ability to go above and beyond, to be great, to be limitless!!!!!!!!!!!!!! YEAAAHHHH!!!!!!!!! - Bermuda

I think you and a couple of other people have it confused. When Pacquiao can't maintain mid range distance, you see far more of an inability to fight going backwards, Morales 1 and much of the Bradley rematch to name a few. It's easy for Pacquiao to maintain mid range distance whilst going backwards and then build momentum coming forward. Morales 1 was like 15 years ago almost... and Manny beat Bradley cleanly twice. I'm going to disagree with you.

If you can't fight backwards Margarito would slaughter you, Manny beat the living sh*t out of him. People don't know what fighting going backwards is, they assume you have to look like Floyd to do it. I think you and a couple of other people have it confused. When Pacquiao can't maintain mid range distance, you see far more of an inability to fight going backwards, Morales 1 and much of the Bradley rematch to name a few. It's easy for Pacquiao to maintain mid range distance whilst going backwards and then build momentum coming forward against the likes of Margarito and Rios.

If you can't fight backwards Margarito would slaughter you, Manny beat the living sh*t out of him. People don't know what fighting going backwards is, they assume you have to look like Floyd to do it. Yep, exactly

If we can just count guys who became champs and held the belt for at least a little bit then Pavlik would have to be on here. First name that came to mind for me. He was an overachiever for his skillset IMO.

lol wtf? Pacquaio has fought going backwards a number of times, against Rios being the latest example. You describe Pacquaio like he's some caveman club fighter. If you can't fight backwards Margarito would slaughter you, Manny beat the living sh*t out of him. People don't know what fighting going backwards is, they assume you have to look like Floyd to do it.

Pacquiao has to be the least well rounded great fighter I've ever seen. Can't fight backwards, cant' fight in the pocket, has a weak jab, has troube adapting to his opponent. It's insane, but he's incredibly fast and explosive! With solid punching power and an above average chin. lol wtf? Pacquaio has fought going backwards a number of times, against Rios being the latest example. You describe Pacquaio like he's some caveman club fighter.

I didn't see Mike Tyson in here.

Pacquiao has to be the least well rounded great fighter I've ever seen. Can't fight backwards, cant' fight in the pocket, has a weak jab, has troube adapting to his opponent. It's insane, but he's incredibly fast and explosive! With solid punching power and an above average chin. It seems you don't know what you're watching but Pacquiao has a very good jab for a Southpaw, he almost killed Margarito go backwards, hurt Marquez going backwards, he has adapted in every single fight he has been in where it was necessary. As for fighting in the pocket, I can't think of one fighter who would fight bigger men in the pocket when they can simply outbox them.

Lol @ bradley and pac being one dimensional. You don't get to the p4p rankings by being one dimensional. Some of the fighters being suggested are some of the best of all time. Being one dimensional doesn't make a difference, what matters is how good that dimension is.

Lol @ bradley and pac being one dimensional. You don't get to the p4p rankings by being one dimensional.

lol, pacquiao can't fight going backwards but floyd "oh, im pinned to the ropes again" mayweather can dumbasses

Bradley is very well-rounded, the problem is he doesn't excel at any one thing besides having a ton of heart and will. He's above average at almost everything. Wtf? Bradley and pacquaio? http://www.troll.me/images/jackie-chan/what-i-dont-even.jpg Bradley is versatile. He can fight going backwards with quick in and out movement vs Marquez and going forward like he's done all of his early career vs Devon, witter, and in pocket vs PAC in rematch Pacquaio can fight going backwards vs bigger guys and forwards He's got boxing iq and can bang So much misinformation in this thread I think Bradley is a different type. Like the ones who don't particularly excel in any aspect but they do everything well. He's not limited in anyway per se, he can box and he can bang,he has some power but not great, he has decent hand speed and his foot work is good. He's just not GREAT at anything except maybe having huge brass balls. http://images.veer.com/stock-photos/Man-fishing-on-boat-OCP0009160.jpg Tut tut tut

I think Bradley is a different type. Like the ones who don't particularly excel in any aspect but they do everything well. He's not limited in anyway per se, he can box and he can bang,he has some power but not great, he has decent hand speed and his foot work is good. He's just not GREAT at anything except maybe having huge brass balls. bradley is a strong puncher. he moves/marks ppl. just not ko. maybe he doesn't snap his punches? i dunno. but he's strong. heard that fool use to brawl with andre ward in the ams. bradley fought at 165 i think.

Timothy Bradley. I think Bradley is a different type. Like the ones who don't particularly excel in any aspect but they do everything well. He's not limited in anyway per se, he can box and he can bang,he has some power but not great, he has decent hand speed and his foot work is good. He's just not GREAT at anything except maybe having huge brass balls.

1970's George Foreman. All he could do is move forward and throw vicious punches. He was such a beast that for the most part, that's all he had to do. However, if one didn't fold under power, he was screwed. Much like Golovkin. Two guys who are exceptional at cutting off the ring and folding guys beneath their power. If Golovkin had a career like Foreman, that would be pretty scary.

Neither did your pictures but I commented on them... You're just mad because the runner can beat 3 guys coming off of losses. 2 off of KO losses. http://stream1.gifsoup.com/view5/2770568/you-mad-o.gif Lol. Stop trolling and go get a hug.