Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

How do YOU define fighter Greatness???

Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • How do YOU define fighter Greatness???

    It's a term that gets thrown around allot. But people are apt to apply their own criteria. For me, it's a kept-loose rating that combines several things, such as their sheer numbers, their quality of opponents and what they did against them. Their time spent at the top of the ratings. Their impact on the sport, their perception by the public in their own time, credit to any contributions to the science, and my very best estimates as to how they might have fared against others of their size from outside their time frame.
    Many fans have built-in reservations regarding the latter point, believing that "it's not possible to make comparisons across different eras". Some in that camp beleive that boxing science has progressed continuously with each decade like the play level of team sports obviously has. Some prefer, therefore to "rate older time fighers all-time based only on what they did within their own time". Others, like myself see zero science progression in evidence over the past 100-plus years where Boxing is concerned and limit my segregation of head to head prognostications within the modern era to fighter size.

    What do you see as your way of measuring a great fighter's greatness????

  • #2
    - - Instincts and eye test.

    Dempsey, Louis for starters, AJ and Usyk for today.
    billeau2 billeau2 likes this.

    Comment


    • #3
      Boxing greatness has been defined many times over history:

      Toughness. The ability to take punishment and not quit no matter what
      Cleverness. The ability to avoid an opponents blows via slipping, parrying, feinting, blocking bobbing and weaving and then counter to vital areas of an opponents head and body.
      Punching power. The ability to land punches with crippling force.
      Conditioning. The ability to fight to the distance at a high rate and not become exhausted.

      Comment


      • #4
        Does he beat the best ones.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Willow The Wisp View Post
          It's a term that gets thrown around allot. But people are apt to apply their own criteria. For me, it's a kept-loose rating that combines several things, such as their sheer numbers, their quality of opponents and what they did against them. Their time spent at the top of the ratings. Their impact on the sport, their perception by the public in their own time, credit to any contributions to the science, and my very best estimates as to how they might have fared against others of their size from outside their time frame.
          Many fans have built-in reservations regarding the latter point, believing that "it's not possible to make comparisons across different eras". Some in that camp beleive that boxing science has progressed continuously with each decade like the play level of team sports obviously has. Some prefer, therefore to "rate older time fighers all-time based only on what they did within their own time". Others, like myself see zero science progression in evidence over the past 100-plus years where Boxing is concerned and limit my segregation of head to head prognostications within the modern era to fighter size.

          What do you see as your way of measuring a great fighter's greatness????
          Winning resume,the manner in which a fighter won ,longevity.
          Willow The Wisp Willow The Wisp likes this.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by QueensburyRules View Post
            - - Instincts and eye test.

            Dempsey, Louis for starters, AJ and Usyk for today.
            AJ OMG lol!
            Porky Pig Porky Pig likes this.

            Comment


            • #7
              All great fighters must have three things. chin, heart, stamina as others have already pointed out. Ring smarts is another. The ability to get off the canvas and still win. Power is not that Important. Like Ali or Willie Pep but he does help.
              Willow The Wisp Willow The Wisp likes this.

              Comment


              • #8
                Winning a lot of times vs ranked vs ring magazine opponents defines greatness. See Cliff Rold's ring magazine article for the percentages. Great fighters should not lose often to non-ring magazine opponets who were never ranked by ring magazine before of after.

                Current fighter such as Fury and Wilder did not fight enough ranked men. Aj has fought his share but the old men over 38 do not count.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Ivich View Post

                  AJ OMG lol!
                  - - U B prayin' fer God's forgiveness soon enough.

                  AJ reignited fallow Brit boxing with the biggest stadium fights and purses in history for his brief time in boxing not to mention the time spent with the British Olympic team in Rio and small gyms in the UK enhancing their profiles.

                  Yer welcome soon enough, so keep on prayin'...

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    skill set
                    competition fought

                    longevity

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X
                    TOP