Best Finishers In Boxing?

[Addison]

Yes. For the most part. You also just came up with a brilliantly simply way to describe a finisher.

It is how sharp a fighters can opener is.

If Pavlik was Chop Chop Corley, Taylor would have survived the 7th round. Same goes for Miranda.

Its deceptive though, because once Pavlik has that can opened, its lights out.

I don't know.. I think they're pretty much dead by the time he corners em.. He does alot of accumulation work, but once he breaks the seal I don't think it's much different from some of the bigger boys you've excluded. He's already crushed the life out of them with those final right hands and the stuff he does on the ropes and in the corners is a mere formality..

[Addison]

No, and here is why. Neither De La Hoya nor Calzaghe really break through an opponents defense, they simply throw such an overwhelming volume of punches that the ref steps in and stops the contest. Very rarely do their opponents get knocked out cold at the end of the exchanges.

Ok, well this is where you're either choosing a ground to stand on that is transparent and microscopic - naked to the eye, but does exist - or you're splitting hairs and breaking your own rules to make the argument work..

[tyson]

[QUOTE=!! Shawn;3306526]Taylor was not helpless until the end. Neither was Miranda. Being helpless is the end result of a well executed finishing.

And this is different when Foster does it than when Pavlik does it?
Pavlik landed solid shots that made both guys pretty much defenseless. He followed up with unanswered shots. Like Foster often did.

It is the difference between how Tommy Hearns put Pepino Cuevas out on his feet then hammered him into the ground for style points, and the way Corrales finished off Castillo in the 10th round.

Bob Foster did Pepino Cuevas type KO's. From what I see, so does Sadler..Saddler has 28 TKO's. Hardly one punch KO's all of those, agreed?

They chase around opponents who are for all intents and purposes out on their feet, and they put those extra style points on.
Just like Pavlik did against Taylor and Miranda, right?

Pavlik doesn't have that kind of power. He rocks a guy, works him to the ropes, picks apart his defense, then puts them out cold.
What kind of power? The kind that makes people defenseless and enables you to breath on them to get them down?

That is what finishing is all about. Getting rid of a hurt fighter that is trying to survive, not throwing a flashy combination at a fighter that would go down if you sneezed on them..

[Silencers]

This is where I differ from many people on how I rank fighters. Accomplishments do not mean ****.

A Ferrari that is a daily driver is still 100 times the car as a Honda that is winning races.

With the same light, I only rate based on what I see with my eyes. As long as they are not tomato cans, who they are fighting is meaningless.

Its all about the way in which they do it. Pavlik does it as well as the rest of my top 5.

If you woke up one day and forgot who every fighter in history was, and you sat down and watched videos of all of the people that have been discussed, you would come up with a list like mine.

That is how I approach ranking a fighters ability, by what they can do, not who they have had the opportunity to do it against, and thats what it boils down to is opportunity.

Some fighters never get the opportunity to build that ATG record, no-matter how hard they try.

I don't get that, to me it's who they finish more so than how they finish. Any fighter can look good finishing subpar opposition, whereas an ATG finisher would finish fighters that are very good. I'm not saying Pavlik has fought subpar opposition but based on who he has finished, he doesn't deserve to be in the top 5 right now.

Edit: How a fighter finishes another fighter is important also and I believe other fighters in history have finished better opposition than Pavlik has just as impressively.

[!! Shawn]

I don't know.. I think they're pretty much dead by the time he corners em.. He does alot of accumulation work, but once he breaks the seal I don't think it's much different from some of the bigger boys you've excluded. He's already crushed the life out of them with those final right hands and the stuff he does on the ropes and in the corners is a mere formality..

It's not a formality, but in principle you just agreed with the basis of my argument. Pavlik finishes so well that it seems like a formality.

If Pavlik tried to simply hammer Taylor with right hands in the corner, Taylor would have covered up and got his senses together.

Same thing with Miranda. If he only tried to bomb them with right hands, Miranda would have cleared his head and come back firing.

Obviously breaking his opponents down round after round does contribute to his ability to finish fighters off, but it is not the biggest factor.

The biggest factor is the way that he uses his "can opener". The way he changes angles, switches southpaw, mixes in the uppercuts with hooks and jabs. The way he mixes up the timing of his punches, the subtle half steps he takes left and right to create new angles with which to finish the job. His patience.

All of it together contribute to make him an INCREDIBLE finisher. IMO top 5 of all time.

He does, break them down over the rounds, that is not in dispute, and this does contribute to his ability to finish a fighter off, but that is also why I included Pryor in my list.

[!! Shawn]

[QUOTE=tyson;3306572]

Taylor was not helpless until the end. Neither was Miranda. Being helpless is the end result of a well executed finishing.

And this is different when Foster does it than when Pavlik does it?
Pavlik landed solid shots that made both guys pretty much defenseless. He followed up with unanswered shots. Like Foster often did.

[/B]It is the difference between how Tommy Hearns put Pepino Cuevas out on his feet then hammered him into the ground for style points, and the way Corrales finished off Castillo in the 10th round.[/B]

Bob Foster did Pepino Cuevas type KO's. From what I see, so does Sadler..
Saddler has 28 TKO's. Hardly one punch KO's all of those, agreed?

They chase around opponents who are for all intents and purposes out on their feet, and they put those extra style points on.
Just like Pavlik did against Taylor and Miranda, right?

Pavlik doesn't have that kind of power. He rocks a guy, works him to the ropes, picks apart his defense, then puts them out cold.
What kind of power? The kind that makes people defenseless and enables you to breath on them to get them down?

That is what finishing is all about. Getting rid of a hurt fighter that is trying to survive, not throwing a flashy combination at a fighter that would go down if you sneezed on them..

m

No, are not understanding what I am trying to say. I think Addison gets the point I am trying to make.

There is a HUGE difference between cracking the defense of a hurt opponent and pummeling an opponent that is out on their feet.

Obviously Pavlik does get in some eye candy at the end, but before that he has to open up their defense and get in the shots to do that.

Foster and Hearns alike had their opponents in that final state after the first punch.

There is a HUGE difference between a fighter that is still able to defend themselves and a fighter that is stumbling around the ring or doing the Pepino Cuevas hoola.

[Addison]

It's not a formality, but in principle you just agreed with the basis of my argument. Pavlik finishes so well that it seems like a formality.

If Pavlik tried to simply hammer Taylor with right hands in the corner, Taylor would have covered up and got his senses together.
Same thing with Miranda. If he only tried to bomb them with right hands, Miranda would have cleared his head and come back firing.

Obviously breaking his opponents down round after round does contribute to his ability to finish fighters off, but it is not the biggest factor.

The biggest factor is the way that he uses his "can opener". The way he changes angles, switches southpaw, mixes in the uppercuts with hooks and jabs. The way he mixes up the timing of his punches, the subtle half steps he takes left and right to create new angles with which to finish the job. His patience.

All of it together contribute to make him an INCREDIBLE finisher. IMO top 5 of all time.

He does, break them down over the rounds, that is not in dispute, and this does contribute to his ability to finish a fighter off, but that is also why I included Pryor in my list.

HaHA.. I don't think Taylor was going to be getting his senses together. Kelly and Jack Loew both detailed infamously how Taylor was done before he hit the post.. Anyways, I think Pavlik is a great finisher. Top 5 of alltime is what created the stir..

If you have Tyson and RWK after you, you probably overstated.. Just something to keep in mind. You and I are talking about who should be the 5. That's tough. I'm suprised you're so sure, I'm not.

[!! Shawn]

Ok, well this is where you're either choosing a ground to stand on that is transparent and microscopic - naked to the eye, but does exist - or you're splitting hairs and breaking your own rules to make the argument work..

I have to disagree. With Calzaghe and De La Hoya, the opponent doesn't necessarily need to be hurt at all. It is enough that they are simply overwhelmed with punches to the point that it looks bad enough for the ref to stop the fight.

Their punchers are all strait machinegun punches. 1-2 1-2 1-2 1-2 1-2 1-2 1-2 1-2 1-2

[Addison]

I have to disagree. With Calzaghe and De La Hoya, the opponent doesn't necessarily need to be hurt at all. It is enough that they are simply overwhelmed with punches to the point that it looks bad enough for the ref to stop the fight.

Their punchers are all strait machinegun punches. 1-2 1-2 1-2 1-2 1-2 1-2 1-2 1-2 1-2

That's what I'm saying; on one hand they can't be too hurt. On the other hand they aren't hurt enough.. I'll assume you feel Aaron Pryor does something far different from Calzaghe and De La Hoya?

[tyson]

[QUOTE=!! Shawn;3306583]

m

No, are not understanding what I am trying to say. I think Addison gets the point I am trying to make.

There is a HUGE difference between cracking the defense of a hurt opponent and pummeling an opponent that is out on their feet.

Obviously Pavlik does get in some eye candy at the end, but before that he has to open up their defense and get in the shots to do that.

Foster and Hearns alike had their opponents in that final state after the first punch.

There is a HUGE difference between a fighter that is still able to defend themselves and a fighter that is stumbling around the ring or doing the Pepino Cuevas hoola.

I understand what you say.

Roy Jones is way better than Pavlik at those things you are describing, even if he chooses not to do so.

You make it out like Foster, Saddler, Robinson, Moore etc punch so hard that people get knocked out cold if they connect, even if they are still on their feet, while Pavlik does not punch hard enough to render his opposition out on their feet, meaning he's a great finisher since his opponents are still on their feet and needs to be punched again.

It makes no sense because you turn it around to suit your argument.

Ali was a great finisher too.