Ranking the Great Heavyweights BY SKILL

[billeau2]

Nebulous

I find it hard to reconcile the general term "skill." It all depends really. For example when we ask what apex predator was the most skilled do we say the King Cobra is greater than the Tiger because he has no legs and has to hunt with his face?

Im being facitious but lets consider that marciano, fighting with short arms, two left feet, found a way to win... That takes tremendous skill of a sort.

then we have specialists. Louis and his technical ability as a puncher, second to none really in his form and one of the best with respect to delivery.

Then we have sets of skills...Gene Tunney utilized technical approaches at the highest level, from bare knuckle strategies to the new emerging emphasis on punching. Gene probably had the most range of any heavyweight skill wise.

Then we have athletic skill. Johnson and Ali, to guys who could do things in the ring that took tremendous athletic skill and reflexes.

What about innovation? Dempsey set up the greatness that would become Louis by focusing on pressure fighting, assortment of punches and hitting with great force along ioth accuracy.

I would not discount guys I have not mentioned. I think when we look at great fighters we see great skill expressed in a muiltitude of ways. We saw that this weekend: No fighter can escape the need to be technically sound. If there is a weakness at the professional level, it will be sussed out, found and exploited.

When Ruiz hit Joshua and was succesful he did not say "oh well thats cool let me go back to my original game plan of pressuring from a distance." No...rather he said, I can hit this guy hard and as long as I hit to his chest, or otherwise keep him going back, he can't hit me hard.

My point is that those adjustments and skills are what makes professional prize fighting more than just a man with some talent and drive.

[DeeMoney]

I find it hard to reconcile the general term "skill." It all depends really. For example when we ask what apex predator was the most skilled do we say the King Cobra is greater than the Tiger because he has no legs and has to hunt with his face?

Im being facitious but lets consider that marciano, fighting with short arms, two left feet, found a way to win... That takes tremendous skill of a sort.

then we have specialists. Louis and his technical ability as a puncher, second to none really in his form and one of the best with respect to delivery.

Then we have sets of skills...Gene Tunney utilized technical approaches at the highest level, from bare knuckle strategies to the new emerging emphasis on punching. Gene probably had the most range of any heavyweight skill wise.

Then we have athletic skill. Johnson and Ali, to guys who could do things in the ring that took tremendous athletic skill and reflexes.

What about innovation? Dempsey set up the greatness that would become Louis by focusing on pressure fighting, assortment of punches and hitting with great force along ioth accuracy.

I would not discount guys I have not mentioned. I think when we look at great fighters we see great skill expressed in a muiltitude of ways. We saw that this weekend: No fighter can escape the need to be technically sound. If there is a weakness at the professional level, it will be sussed out, found and exploited.

When Ruiz hit Joshua and was succesful he did not say "oh well thats cool let me go back to my original game plan of pressuring from a distance." No...rather he said, I can hit this guy hard and as long as I hit to his chest, or otherwise keep him going back, he can't hit me hard.

My point is that those adjustments and skills are what makes professional prize fighting more than just a man with some talent and drive.

Excellent points, I had a similar thought. I reconciled in my mind that skills refer to a high level of ability regardless of natural athleticism (strength, speed, agility, reflex, endurance, and body type).

Take Ali for example, a great fighter to be sure, but it seems as if a significant portion of his success was due to him being longer and faster than most of his opponents. So I attribute that to athletic ability as opposed to skill.

Of course, this leads to some difficulty in isolating variables; and then we have to take into account how much of a fighter's skills (or lack their of) are dependent on their actual athleticism.

[billeau2]

Excellent points, I had a similar thought. I reconciled in my mind that skills refer to a high level of ability regardless of natural athleticism (strength, speed, agility, reflex, endurance, and body type).

Take Ali for example, a great fighter to be sure, but it seems as if a significant portion of his success was due to him being longer and faster than most of his opponents. So I attribute that to athletic ability as opposed to skill.

Of course, this leads to some difficulty in isolating variables; and then we have to take into account how much of a fighter's skills (or lack their of) are dependent on their actual athleticism.

Yup those are issues that need clarification for all the reasons you mention.

[QueensburyRules]

- -First off, Ali being long and fast ain't a skill, it's a natural attribute.

Second, original "athletes were Ancient Greek Olympians competing in track and field. Moronic boxing media continue trot out their ignorance of the subject much like they did with drug testing, such that any American who runs and stinks out the ring is labeled athletic that eliminates actual fighters.

The best athletes were always the decathletes who combine multiple skills with multiple natural attributes.

Wlad and AJ do just that and in a superstars comp would be unbeatable. Ken Norton was a star track and football player before he learned to fight in the Marines. He and Frazier entered SS in the 70s. Joe flopped comically, but Ken placed 2nd, just getting beat out by soccer star Kyle Rote Jr who did well in every event and surprisingly stronger than Ken in wt lifting in spite of weighing 40 or more lbs less.

Yet obviously Joe obviously the better fighter proving athleticism only goes so far in boxing.

[Rusty Tromboni]

I find it hard to reconcile the general term "skill." It all depends really. For example when we ask what apex predator was the most skilled do we say the King Cobra is greater than the Tiger because he has no legs and has to hunt with his face?

Im being facitious but lets consider that marciano, fighting with short arms, two left feet, found a way to win... That takes tremendous skill of a sort.

then we have specialists. Louis and his technical ability as a puncher, second to none really in his form and one of the best with respect to delivery.

Then we have sets of skills...Gene Tunney utilized technical approaches at the highest level, from bare knuckle strategies to the new emerging emphasis on punching. Gene probably had the most range of any heavyweight skill wise.

Then we have athletic skill. Johnson and Ali, to guys who could do things in the ring that took tremendous athletic skill and reflexes.

What about innovation? Dempsey set up the greatness that would become Louis by focusing on pressure fighting, assortment of punches and hitting with great force along ioth accuracy.

I would not discount guys I have not mentioned. I think when we look at great fighters we see great skill expressed in a muiltitude of ways. We saw that this weekend: No fighter can escape the need to be technically sound. If there is a weakness at the professional level, it will be sussed out, found and exploited.

When Ruiz hit Joshua and was succesful he did not say "oh well thats cool let me go back to my original game plan of pressuring from a distance." No...rather he said, I can hit this guy hard and as long as I hit to his chest, or otherwise keep him going back, he can't hit me hard.

My point is that those adjustments and skills are what makes professional prize fighting more than just a man with some talent and drive.

Great post.

"Skilled" is pretty nebulous. We might all have an idea what's meant, but without a specific definition there's clearly opportunity for gross equivocation. I think you demonstrate pretty well that having unique and useful skills is not the same as being skilled. And it needs to be separated from natural attributes or physical ability.

Marciano and Foreman were very effective punchers, but you wouldn't teach someone to fight like them.

[Rusty Tromboni]

Excellent points, I had a similar thought. I reconciled in my mind that skills refer to a high level of ability regardless of natural athleticism (strength, speed, agility, reflex, endurance, and body type).

Take Ali for example, a great fighter to be sure, but it seems as if a significant portion of his success was due to him being longer and faster than most of his opponents. So I attribute that to athletic ability as opposed to skill.

Of course, this leads to some difficulty in isolating variables; and then we have to take into account how much of a fighter's skills (or lack their of) are dependent on their actual athleticism.

Nailed it.

[Rusty Tromboni]

- -First off, Ali being long and fast ain't a skill, it's a natural attribute.

Second, original "athletes were Ancient Greek Olympians competing in track and field. Moronic boxing media continue trot out their ignorance of the subject much like they did with drug testing, such that any American who runs and stinks out the ring is labeled athletic that eliminates actual fighters.

The best athletes were always the decathletes who combine multiple skills with multiple natural attributes.

Wlad and AJ do just that and in a superstars comp would be unbeatable. Ken Norton was a star track and football player before he learned to fight in the Marines. He and Frazier entered SS in the 70s. Joe flopped comically, but Ken placed 2nd, just getting beat out by soccer star Kyle Rote Jr who did well in every event and surprisingly stronger than Ken in wt lifting in spite of weighing 40 or more lbs less.

Yet obviously Joe obviously the better fighter proving athleticism only goes so far in boxing.

So how do you reconcile calling Louis the most skilled and being dependent on having tremendous punching power?

If he were feather-fisted would he have been any different than Folley?

His offense is text-book, and he had tremendous power in those punches. But I certainly would not call him the most skilled or complete. You could say: the most physically talented, technically sound (as a puncher), and specialist. But saying he's the most skilled is a stretch.

-


Yet obviously Joe obviously the better fighter proving athleticism only goes so far in boxing.

But Norton WAS more skilled than Joe. I know you are talking about athleticism as it relates to complete ability. But Joe was better than Ken not because he was more skilled, but because he was a more formidable Boxer.

[billeau2]

Great post.

"Skilled" is pretty nebulous. We might all have an idea what's meant, but without a specific definition there's clearly opportunity for gross equivocation. I think you demonstrate pretty well that having unique and useful skills is not the same as being skilled. And it needs to be separated from natural attributes or physical ability.

Marciano and Foreman were very effective punchers, but you wouldn't teach someone to fight like them.

Yup.

Great example of that i thought of today> there was a former Navy Seal who is a motivational speaker now, and he was talking about pain. His point was that when he was doing some feats that took tremendous endurance, he learned to deal with the pain. I'm simplifying it, as he had a revolutionary way of dealing with pain...being that he is a motivational thinker and all lol.

And I thought to myself as I was struggling with something...Is there some magic gene that lets some of us push more than others? And Im talking about if all things are equal, lets say we are identical twins, clones... We both get punched in the face with the same punch...What would cause any differences in our tolerance, our threshold dealing with the physical pain?

I admire individuals who have the attitude that they will find a way or die trying. I admire this because it seems to take so much...and while some are gifted with skills to avoid more pain, the character it takes to deal with real pain is undeniable.

So when we see a guy like Lyle, or Gatti, etc, did they have more tolerance for pain? was this a skill that, unseen, allowed them to hang in there? Or was it coming from a place that we all have? and even in the absence of greatness and the skills of greatness, allowed these men of more typical skill (at the professional level) to succeed at times against better skilled men? it makes one think about the role of skill and how much self determination can succeed in places even skill fears to tread.

[Luccio]

Yup.

Great example of that i thought of today> there was a former Navy Seal who is a motivational speaker now, and he was talking about pain. His point was that when he was doing some feats that took tremendous endurance, he learned to deal with the pain. I'm simplifying it, as he had a revolutionary way of dealing with pain...being that he is a motivational thinker and all lol.

this explains a lot about you kid....

[BattlingNelson]

this explains a lot about you kid....

This alt has had a very poor start in this section.