What separates elite from great

If ur talking bout that Salido fight then no, low blows and holding for dear life is not good boxing. Not to mention not even making weight smh

I think the biggest factor is single mindedness. Zeroing in on exactly what you want to accomplish and what you want to be, and pursuing that. The curve going from decent, to good, to great, to elite, to ATG is extremely logarithmic. It takes MUCH more work to go from great to elite than it is to go from good to great. Most guys lose focus, or get distracted by many other things that they do not focus on that one sport to become great. It's that drive that guys like Kobe and Jordan had to be better than anyone. It's not enough to lift weights and train fr 4 hours a day. You need to visualize what you want to be. It's what makes identifying prospects relatively easy. You'll look at guys like Haney or Canelo when they were young, they look spectacular, have advanced skills, and are easily much better than anyone else at their age/level.

Elite - better than the rest Great - did great things (obviously) like make elite fighters look ordinary, fight at a disadvantage, fought cleanly, longevity, etc.

Ha ha... pretty similar to what I just posted above, cept it was the early 80s for me. Co-sign. Agreed. This era has some pretty damn good fighters.

Elite is an excellent fighter for whatever reason and gets to the top of the mountain. A great is an elite fighter with the desire and will to stay on top over a long period. An elite fighter can have a great run in their career but when talking about them you would usually hear the term "what if" in a major way. If a fighter is truly great there are very few "what ifs" that are truly meaningful.

Elite fighters never look avg vs blevel guys. They should completely outclass guys of lesser class.

I'd be inclined to leave that judgement to the boxing historians of the future, man. In every era of boxing you've had the pundits and fans complaining about the inferiority of contemporary boxers compared to their mighty predecessors (and indeed the clear degeneration of masculinity within wider society) and I'm sure in 30 or 40 years this era will also be looked back upon by many through rosy hued shades too. Let’s just say I wouldn’t bet the house on it

I think the difference with elite and great fighters is that one is a product of learned science, the other an artist.

I have been following boxing since the mid 70's and some of today's fighters are comparable to fighters from any era. It is easy to reminisce and claim that the athletes of today are no match for the athletes of the past. My father and grandfathers did it all the time. I claim B.S. Every decade has it's great athletes and that includes boxing. Some divisions may be weaker than others at times but that has always been the case. The issue with boxing currrently is that the promoters are too protective and are avoiding pitting the best against the best. Ha ha... pretty similar to what I just posted above, cept it was the early 80s for me. Co-sign.

Most fighters from this era are far from being elite let alone great I'd be inclined to leave that judgement to the boxing historians of the future, man. In every era of boxing you've had the pundits and fans complaining about the inferiority of contemporary boxers compared to their mighty predecessors (and indeed the clear degeneration of masculinity within wider society) and I'm sure in 30 or 40 years this era will also be looked back upon by many through rosy hued shades too.

Yes I know that, but most of the posters here do not. None of the current active boxers have achieved greatness let alone became eite/legendary besides maybe a few, and by few I mean like 1-2. And that 1-2 includes Pac-Man. Other than that, still got WAAYYYSSS TO GO. I have been following boxing since the mid 70's and some of today's fighters are comparable to fighters from any era. It is easy to reminisce and claim that the athletes of today are no match for the athletes of the past. My father and grandfathers did it all the time. I claim B.S. Every decade has it's great athletes and that includes boxing. Some divisions may be weaker than others at times but that has always been the case. The issue with boxing currrently is that the promoters are too protective and are avoiding pitting the best against the best.

Yes I know that, but most of the posters here do not. None of the current active boxers have achieved greatness let alone became eite/legendary besides maybe a few, and by few I mean like 1-2. And that 1-2 includes Pac-Man. Other than that, still got WAAYYYSSS TO GO. I can agree with Pac But then it’s all up for debate

Been done tried telling these cats. They think Spence Crawford and Loma have actually achieved anything. They haven’t even been thru their first war yet. Loma has like what, 4 fights and 1 loss? GTFOH. If those guys fought each other it would definitely be a war

Welcome to NSB

Broner is someone with natural ability but obviously didn't continue to work at it like Mayweather. Then you got a guy who’s just average ( Arturo Gatti ) but the heart and will of ten That’ll make a difference

Wow. I sure hope you are implying that ELITE > GREAT. Because if not, then your word is irrelevant. In boxing, being ELITE means being even better than the best. How do u prove so? By BEATING THE BEST. And overcoming daunting tasks or breaking records by doing things other wouldn’t think likely. So by that definition, Spence and Crawford ain’t even made any steps close to being elite. Not even great. Most fighters from this era are far from being elite let alone great

Yeah I'd go with natural ability. Then you add on top of that hard work, training, keeping in shape, taking care of their body, desire to win and not lose...then you're combining the heart/desire/will with the skill/talent/training. Mayweather obviously has God given ability...but he also took care of that ability and maximized protecting it through defense first approach Some guys excel in one particular area of talent like speed, power, chin etc, but don't take care of their body or over expose that one talent...others truly love and enjoy the sport, train hard, but don't have the natural ability, twitch fibers, etc. Other's have the natural ability, but don't train or care for developing the skills around their ability and don't make it far. Guys like Loma and May have combined those things...they excelled at using their natural ability and perfecting it Broner is someone with natural ability but obviously didn't continue to work at it like Mayweather.

It's all about who's on the best roids or juice. The better synthetic steroids you got; the better fighter you will be.

Yeah I'd go with natural ability. Then you add on top of that hard work, training, keeping in shape, taking care of their body, desire to win and not lose...then you're combining the heart/desire/will with the skill/talent/training. Mayweather obviously has God given ability...but he also took care of that ability and maximized protecting it through defense first approach Some guys excel in one particular area of talent like speed, power, chin etc, but don't take care of their body or over expose that one talent...others truly love and enjoy the sport, train hard, but don't have the natural ability, twitch fibers, etc. Other's have the natural ability, but don't train or care for developing the skills around their ability and don't make it far. Guys like Loma and May have combined those things...they excelled at using their natural ability and perfecting it

Lomachenko was bred to be a champion and his father is a genius. Best decision was probably to enroll him in traditional Ukrainian dancing when he was a kid. This gives him an almost unfair advantage in the ring, until a savage with no sense or reason and a weight advantage just bugs out his programming that is.