The greatest defensive artists of all time

[Dynamite Kid]

A defensive wizard, is someone who occasionally stays in range long enough to be hit, but is still good defensively imo, that's why I rate Whitaker so highly. Whitaker would stay in the pocket consistently, even against big punchers, now Whitaker occasionally got put down, sometimes to do with balance, sometimes cause he wasn't scared to press his advantage when in control (Roger Mayweather)

Mayweather is a good defensive fighter, but he's not as skilled as Whitaker was defensively, as Whitaker took chances whilst being defensive, he gave the opponents the opportunity to fire back by staying in range more, Mayweather can fight in the pocket, but he doesn't tend to fight there consistently, he likes to use his legs more, and that is what separates Whitaker and Mayweather imo. Mayweather is like Wlad, his cautiousness is part of why he's so good defensively, that and the fact he uses more movement to offset the opponent, is why I consider Whitaker the better defensive fighter.

[LeadUppercut]

I don't want to this thread to get hijacked as its about defensive fighters, but I disagree with you based solely on the fact that today's fighters look terrible by the 10th round. Their conditioning is terrible and they have little to give.

Jack Johnson once competed 26 rounds in a fight scheduled for 45 rounds.

That alone just blows away your theory. Boxing matches used to go on for 15 rounds, not 12. Most of today's boxers would be dead trying to compete for that long. All you have to do is watch how poor they look in 10 round matches. Today's boxers look at the end of 12 round matches like yesterday's boxers looked after 15!

I understand the point you were making, but its doesn't fly in light of those facts concerning boxing.

Let's get back to defensive fighters, guys!

No, a boxing match did not have a limit, some fights lasted over 200 rounds.

I am not lying man, honestly..... the thing is, the rules of engagement were different, and a round had no time limit. The round ended whenever the referee intervened. e.g. Both fighters come out, within a few seconds one lands a hook, a fighter is wobbled or dropped, the referee will intervene, the round is over, and will be scored for the guy who landed the punch.

Also, there were much fewer rules, you could wrestle, hold, even choke.

Years ago I remember seeing one old pic showing a fighter with his forearm across the other guys throat while winding up a punch.

Viva Marquis de Queensbury.

[Rapid Counter]

Like I have said, I actually went to University and STUDIED the histories of sports and its evolution.

Its no point to argue with people who think Boxing is somehow special and time doesnt affect it, what part of Level of Competition (LOC) dont you get?

Lets take Jack Johnsons 26 rounder.

What was his punch-output?
What was his calories burned per minute?
What was in his body? Oh wait they never tested you?
What power were the punches being thrown at?
How many punches was his opponent throwing and landing per round?
How strict were the Judges?
Didnt he take a dive?
Was fight fixed? (most were)

You see you can put Manny/Floyd against some club fighter and they can go 30 rounds too if they trained for it, getting hit in the face hard by a guy who actually has skills?

But you guys keep thinking that Boxing is THE only sport in THE HISTORY OF THE WORLD not to change, and im not talking about guys from 70's+, im talking about the 1910+ guys who are calling them ATG, its a complete joke.

All you "Boxing is not diffirent, those dudes were ATG!" are worse than *****s,*******s,Tyson fans and Religious psychos.

No matter what proof you give you will always say nah man, he went like 30 rounds dude, I mean nobody can do that now man!

Contact your local university, enroll in a Sports course, actually examine the evidence of
1) how they fought
2) who they fought
3) Level Of Competition and the diffirence between a #1 and a #5
4) How they trained
5) How strict were the rules
6) Medicine

but yea, they are ATG! For real! Anyone can look good against a dude working a 50 hour week at a coal mine who has piss poor technique.

But according to you guys, Boxing is only sport in history of the world not to be affected by Evolution? You guys must be religious nuts who also Believe a fairy tale book right?

"Sports Evolution don't know s**t about boxing"

This is boxing son, not 100 meter sprint or high jump. A punch in the face in the 1930's hurts the same as a punch in the face today. Did humans evolve to have better chins in the last 80 years? Because according to Darwin it takes hundreds of thousands to millions of years. Doesn't matter what the era is, the creme always rises to the top. So any great from any era will be great with modern day training and nutrition.

[LeadUppercut]

Like I have said, I actually went to University and STUDIED the histories of sports and its evolution.

Its no point to argue with people who think Boxing is somehow special and time doesnt affect it, what part of Level of Competition (LOC) dont you get?

Lets take Jack Johnsons 26 rounder.

What was his punch-output?
What was his calories burned per minute?
What was in his body? Oh wait they never tested you?
What power were the punches being thrown at?
How many punches was his opponent throwing and landing per round?
How strict were the Judges?
Didnt he take a dive?
Was fight fixed? (most were)

You see you can put Manny/Floyd against some club fighter and they can go 30 rounds too if they trained for it, getting hit in the face hard by a guy who actually has skills?

But you guys keep thinking that Boxing is THE only sport in THE HISTORY OF THE WORLD not to change, and im not talking about guys from 70's+, im talking about the 1910+ guys who are calling them ATG, its a complete joke.

All you "Boxing is not diffirent, those dudes were ATG!" are worse than *****s,*******s,Tyson fans and Religious psychos.

No matter what proof you give you will always say nah man, he went like 30 rounds dude, I mean nobody can do that now man!

Contact your local university, enroll in a Sports course, actually examine the evidence of
1) how they fought
2) who they fought
3) Level Of Competition and the diffirence between a #1 and a #5
4) How they trained
5) How strict were the rules
6) Medicine

but yea, they are ATG! For real! Anyone can look good against a dude working a 50 hour week at a coal mine who has piss poor technique.

But according to you guys, Boxing is only sport in history of the world not to be affected by Evolution? You guys must be religious nuts who also Believe a fairy tale book right?

It is ridiculous for you to insinuate that Emil Zatopek wasnt all that great because his time is **** compared to athletes who use modern training techniques (and steroids).

Sorry dude, I will never agree.

You NEVER compare apples with oranges, ever.

If Zatopek, or Robinson, wasnt that great, then why werent their feats emulated at the time?

[NChristo]

[LeadUppercut]

hanks to TheGreatA for making these videos, theyre outstanding. I also love his Fastest Punchers of All Time ones.

the amount of boxing videos he put on youtube is legendary.

Noted.

Sharkey was a pretty good defensive fighter in his day:

Props to you Sir, many thanks.

[b0ndsj0ns20]

I think you can argue that some guys from way back when wouldn't be good now, but there are a lot that would be. The one that sticks out the most is Sugar Ray Robinson. He would be an ATG in any era.

[TouchyAndalou]

I know im going to be hated for this but. I will never rate fighters who I havent seen extensively as great, but yet for the longest time we have all these old farts telling us how amazing these guys were when there is 1-2 grainy video's for their entire careers.

Boxing was so diffirent back then, level of competition was much lower, their technique was worse and how many of them took it like a full time job? Maybe the top of the top could afford to do it, and they fought dudes who worked 50 hours in a coal mine.

I know Boxing is a old-mans sport but I also know that if enough people say something for lots of years then it must be true right? Wrong.

I studied Sport Evolution, and I will say those guys were greats in their time they are NOTHING compared to todays fighter.

Today's fighter is better educated, better trained, better prepared, has better medical access.

Todays boxing is less corrupt, alot more competitive since even a Journeyman makes enough money off boxing to train full time and truly great fighters are seperated by a very thin margin. and we also have FULL VIDEO Evidence for almost all fights of any modern fighter and dont cherry pick 1-2 Grainy Videos where you cant see anything.

Could they have been greats today? Maybe, theres ALOT more competition today and alot of fighters get weeded out thru the Amateurs so we only get best of the crop.

Back then? Heya Joe, I heard you were the toughest guy in town! You wanna fight Bobby from ******ia? Sure!

I cant wait until 20-30 years pass so most of the old dudes who are clinging on to the past are gone and we base fighters on their performances that we can actually see and rate them on, instead of rating people off 1-2 grainy videos and wivestales from the modern equivalent of *****s and *******s

/flame on

You stumbled onto one or two worthwhile points, but get a monkey to write a whole bunch of words and, statistically, it's likely he would as well. Terrible post.

[IronDanHamza]

Freddie Welsh.

[TouchyAndalou]

Also, LOL at boxing and 100 metre sprint comparisons. Re. Tard. Ed.