Do you think that we underestimate "basic boxers"?

Collapse
Collapse
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Wurider
    Contender
    Silver Champion - 100-500 posts
    • Oct 2018
    • 159
    • 51
    • 25
    • 127,843

    #1

    Do you think that we underestimate "basic boxers"?

    It seems that it is viewed as a negative trait when a boxer is "basic". Why is that the case? What is wrong with being solid in all areas but not spectacular in one particular. I look at Haney and see no areas where he excels but some how he gets the job done. Should we show more appreciation for basic fighters?
  • Smash
    Undisputed Champion
    Unified Champion - 10,00-20,000 posts
    • Nov 2008
    • 16009
    • 6,513
    • 7,918
    • 21,172

    #2
    bill is coming after u for calling devin basic

    Comment

    • Spray_resistant
      Vacant interim regular(C)
      Franchise Champion - 20,000+ posts
      • Feb 2009
      • 29507
      • 2,908
      • 1,531
      • 53,384

      #3
      Mikey Garcia was a perfect example of a successful basic boxer.

      Comment

      • M312
        Undisputed Champion
        Platinum Champion - 1,000-5,000 posts
        • Apr 2021
        • 2432
        • 1,037
        • 264
        • 0

        #4
        I'm not a big fan of Haney, hes mostly boring and lacks power. But YDKSAB if you think Haney is basic.

        His footwork alone is world class. No need to mention defense, ring generalship, counter punching.

        Comment

        • The D3vil
          WBA/WBC/WBO/IBF/Lineal
          Super Champion - 5,000-10,000 posts
          • Mar 2016
          • 6308
          • 1,608
          • 1,406
          • 56,286

          #5
          Yes, Bernard Hopkins was called basic too, which is why he was always underestimated.

          Same thing with Carlos Monzon

          Comment

          Working...
          TOP