Henry Armstrong: Skilled boxer or brawler?

[tatangb45]

Armstrong is considered by many as anywhere in the top 3 boxers of all time. He fought way before any of the posters here were born and the only way to see how great he was as a fighter would be from u-tube video clips. From these videos, it looks like he is more of a strong non-stop brawler rather than as a skilled boxer in the likes of SRR, Ali, etc.. Should that be the case and with Armstrong being a top 3 ATG, then why is it that many in this forum are downgrading that specific style as compared to the 'skilled' or to be more specific, 'slick' type?

[IronDanHamza]

He was an aggressive fighter and a brawler type but he was skilled also.

It doesn't matter if you're skilled, slick, a brawler, aggressive or defensive when it comes to greatness.

It's all down to what you do and achieve as a fighter.

[Dudley]

plus the guy had some where around 300 fight's when boxing was huge! Compared to boxing now...

Back in the day they used to have boxing gyms on every other corner filled with fighters. Where is the last boxing gym you've seen? a few elite gyms at best Wildcard and kronk gym... in different cities...

BTW good read if your into it.


The Third God of War: Henry Armstrong
At his peak, an act of God.


The Third God of War: Henry Armstrong
By Springs Toledo from Sweet Science


“Batten down the hatches…!”
~ Chambers Journal, 1883

http://www.cyberboxingzone.com/cbzforum/showthread.php?10009-The-Third-God-of-War-Henry-Armstrong

[Manny#1ATG]

lol what a disingenuous question...if this isn't an attempt at a bait and switch idk what is.

[tatangb45]

He was an aggressive fighter and a brawler type but he was skilled also.

It doesn't matter if you're skilled, slick, a brawler, aggressive or defensive when it comes to greatness.

It's all down to what you do and achieve as a fighter.

Exactly what i am trying to point out to those who insist that slick is better than anything else, especially when they apply it to current fighters.

[tatangb45]

lol what a disingenuous question...if this isn't an attempt at a bait and switch idk what is.

So, this is not a valid argument? Explain.

[edgarg]

Armstrong is considered by many as anywhere in the top 3 boxers of all time. He fought way before any of the posters here were born and the only way to see how great he was as a fighter would be from u-tube video clips. From these videos, it looks like he is more of a strong non-stop brawler rather than as a skilled boxer in the likes of SRR, Ali, etc.. Should that be the case and with Armstrong being a top 3 ATG, then why is it that many in this forum are downgrading that specific style as compared to the 'skilled' or to be more specific, 'slick' type?

At that time, when I was a kid, he was regarded as a non-stop puncher with tremendous stamina who overwhelmed his opposition.

[tatangb45]

At that time, when I was a kid, he was regarded as a non-stop puncher with tremendous stamina who overwhelmed his opposition.

And who today would be closest to that description?