Which boxer has the most complex technical style in history?
Collapse
-
Chavez, bless him, is a Tyny fellow pounding Floyd into reverse and onto the ropes to be savaged.
Yeah, must be tough idolizing an emasculated Floyd.Comment
-
You're free to watch the whole fight as is anyone else. Nothing will change. You just got caught in a lie and Mayweather apparently ruined your life lol. Deal with it.Comment
-
I see that the Rock is being short shrifted again in the complexity department.
Rock's ring generalship was the most complex in the history of the game, but it was all a deep ruse. He had opponents convinced he was defensively irresponsible and easy to smack. Then they tried to hit him. Eel slippery, that boy, yet he appeared uncouth and clumsy, by buggery, to audience and foe alike. This deception was instilled in every aspect of his game. Such trickery takes immense skill and complexity to pull off.Comment
-
The results of Manny and Floyd that night as horrendous as their milquetoast performances.
Seems to bother you that I know more and are more even handed in judging those fights.Comment
-
I just saw this post. Being a martial artist for years I like to look at research and the work of people like Don Draeger. There are certain patterns that repeat. One pattern is that when an art is used by a professional caste, it usually has methods of specialization but in general has footwork to make the art deceptive, and to make the art easy when weilding weapons.
As the art becomes more commonplace and used by a civilian population, the first thing to go is the footwork, the movements that make the art subtle and not obvious in its application to the opponent.
There are so many examples of this... Sayok Kali... a new blade art that uses templates to direct attacks with the knife. The original Kali styles of South East Asian blade work used dances which involved complex movements used in the footwork. The templates take out, simplify the footwork so more people can use the art. Judo which uses tactile wrestling range, as opposed to Ju Jutsu which uses footwork associated with the sword, and unbalancing an opponent from all ranges.
And as a general principle as well: Karate Do (the sportive aspect of empty hand fighting in the Okinawan and Japanese manner) and kick boxing all kick from a range where a skilled opponent can block the kicks. In the older arts kicks were done at a range where you are close to the opponent and they come in under his sight line. He never sees the kick when done properly, and they are often used against a grappler.
In boxing the type of European derived fencing that branches off of what Marchegiani chronicles historically is based off of fencing. So before the classical age a boxer used lunges, parrying, traps, which was actually very effective. Remember that the fencing Figg did was not sports oriented but accounted for the use of a short weapon, long weapon, a buckler (parrying movements), etc.
The footwork eventually changed to accomodate the punches, and the work of those who developed subtleties related to punching exclusively. So, we had shoulder movements, a false centerline (Hopkins still uses this) and stepping with, and stepping before the punch.
Eventually these movements developed into stepping just across the opponent to cut the ring off, stepping with a crow step before realising the punch (liston mastered this), turning different parts of the body in turn instead of everything moving at once... So Dempsey stepping in one direction, swinging the shoulders in another, archie Moore, using the shoulder to deflect and turn while the feet came in, and swinging the counter punch into the opponent.
In fencing because you were running a man through, the body weight had to be forward and going in the same place... So this departure in boxing allowed fighters to set different traps, and to work at a more confrontational distance. Joe Louis set up right in front of the person and kept his distance/jabbed as opposed to Dempsey who would start his assault from around sword length away (3-5 feet from the other person's guard).
Some fighters like Tunney were so fantastic that they actually combined elements of both systems into one...Tunney was mentored by Corbett who was from the old bare knuckles systems (though he never fought a bare knuckle match) and came up also studying the modern punchers methods which used a jab a great deal.
The heavyweights are useful because one can easily see the changes in how they fought. Obviously these changes and the many great fighters who came up under both systems all developed footwork.
Now heres the thing that I see: As someone who can see the elements of technical skill employed by a fighter, most notably, footwork, distancing, punching technique... when I see most modern fighters i see a lack of these skills. The Ammy style is used by the pros as well and was discussed back in the past. A jab and forward step followed with the power hand when the opponent is open, is a very unsophisticated technique and it is what we mostly see these days. So I think to myself; is boxing going backwards? are fighters being taught how to parry, step properly, cut the ring off, move off line, distance themselves?
Thats why I make a lot of the comments that I do.Comment
-
He wasn't the most complex fighter but he was a very good and crafty fighter. A lot more complex than a guy like Erroll Spence, who in the modern style returns his hands to his face, sits still and doesn't move his head and retains good balance. It looks great on TV vs under matched opposition, but the truly technical greats are over looked by even apparent boxing history buffs.
I was at the gym the other day, and this pro thought he would chime into my conversation about Old-school fighters. He brought up Hopkins and Jones. Lol. I had to leave at that point.Comment
-
Comment
-
Marciano was a crafty fighter, everyone thought he was a face first slugger and he knocked em all out. What's so funny is even in his day they were knocking him for the same things they are today. He's too small, he's slow, he's clumsy. Rocky was a good fighter, his close trainers realized he had a talent for fighting and natural leverage.
He wasn't the most complex fighter but he was a very good and crafty fighter. A lot more complex than a guy like Erroll Spence, who in the modern style returns his hands to his face, sits still and doesn't move his head and retains good balance. It looks great on TV vs under matched opposition, but the truly technical greats are over looked by even apparent boxing history buffs.
I was at the gym the other day, and this pro thought he would chime into my conversation about Old-school fighters. He brought up Hopkins and Jones. Lol. I had to leave at that point.
Your dealing with an unfortunate reality. One cannot easily see subtlety. In fact, it is a lot like gravity, one only knows it exists from the effect it has. So for example, making punches graze can mean little to the judges, but can make the difference between a great fighter and someone who is hittable. To appreciate the subtle film studies are great. even when they are badly done studies, where a fighter goes to pick his nose (with gloves on) and the narrator says " Look at how Jim foresees a punch to his beak and protects it" most times the narrator does find stuff that is relevant.
Film studies show that Marciano was very deliberate and capable. The fact that he did not look to be was an advantage. Goldman was the genius who taught the bowlegged, short reached Marciano leverage. It involved coming forwards in a manner that would make Dempsey cringe. In martial arts there are techniques where, to avoid a punch you go directly into the punch and let it slide past you coming in. You change the distance the puncher uses rapidly so his punch sails over you. Rock was a master at this.Comment
Comment