Most complete active fighters in the sport?

[- Ram Raid -]

Okay sorry, I worded that wrong.


What I meant was you don't have over 300 amateur wins, against the level of opposition that Kovalev and GGG have had (and win not by KO) and not have boxing ability.


The Amir Khan comment doesn't even make sense.

I wouldn't question that they have boxing ability. You used their respective amateur pedigrees to back up your reasoning that they are complete fighters because of the amount of bouts they'd won (I'll assume you referred to Golovkin with the 300+ comment).

When I asked if Broner was also a complete fighter 'cause he has 300 amateur wins you said it was about the level of opposition fought rather than the volume.

So that's where the Khan question came in. Mario Kindelan was about the highest level of opposition you could hope to face in a vest. Khan has a win over him and an Olympic silver medal to boot. That's more than Sergey achieved and matches the top honour that Golovkin has.

So following your line of reasoning asking if Khan would also be considered a complete fighter is, well . . . perfectly reasonable.

[King_]

Whether or not they're choosing to fight in a certain style is quite irrelevant.

They haven't proved they can fight another way. Only when they do can you label them "complete fighters". Knocking over a bunch of bums and overmatched opponents doesn't prove anything. One day, someone is going to ask questions of them.

Until then, your opinion that they're "complete fighters" is a very flimsy one. Especially when they've already shown flaws against poorer opposition.

Yes they have. They have shown they can fight in another way in the amateurs.

I didn't say they were perfect- every fighter has flaws. The only fighter close to flawless is Wlad because he has absolutely perfected the sweet science. More so then any other active fighter of the past 8 years.


I guess with some people only time will tell, but you will eventually see the completeness of Kovalev/GGG if the top fighters ever stop ducking them. Until then they will continue to destroy who's put in front of them because they're just too good.

[Tha_Greatest]

How can you leave Floyd Mayweather out?? seriously how?

floyd cant inside fight for ****, lol, he gets beaten up with brawls so he gets cornered, lol, then you see him complaining all day, lol, floyd is not any good when it comes to fighting, lol, he relies too much on his ****in defense, lol, the brawling ability is the ability that floyd lakks, lol, a fat slow grandpa de la hoya for gods sake almost beat floyd, lol, oscars fat azz isnt even a brawler and was never a skillful brawler either, lol,

[Dirk Diggler UK]

Yes they have. They have shown they can fight in another way in the amateurs.

I didn't say they were perfect- every fighter has flaws. The only fighter close to flawless is Wlad because he has absolutely perfected the sweet science. More so then any other active fighter of the past 8 years.


I guess with some people only time will tell, but you will eventually see the completeness of Kovalev/GGG if the top fighters ever stop ducking them. Until then they will continue to destroy who's put in front of them because they're just too good.

Who the hell cares about the amateurs? Audley Harrison won a gold medal in the amateurs

Wlad? LOL....the guy can't fight on the inside to save his ***ing life. You're trolling now.

[WarMaidana]

martin murray???

[nivek535]

Which fighters have the most complete/widest skillsets?


There is a handful of boxers who do many, many things well and can incorporate defense with aggression.


(not gonna list prospects or guys who aren't already in the top 10 of their divisions)



My list of the most complete fighters in the sport:


Gennady Golovkin
Sergey Kovalev
Terrance Crawford
Roman Gonzalez
Manny Pacquiao
Vasyl Lomachenko
Takashi Uchyama
Kell Brook
Keith Thurman
Floyd Mayweather
Martin Murray
Rigo
Bernard Hopkins




There's a couple of them. Who else?

nicholas walters
and probably naoya inoue

[Black Barty]

Does "complete" include physical gifts, too? Or only the skillset?

The fighters who can do it all and are above average physically in every aspect:

Ward, Rigo, Loma (based on the eye test), Gonzalez, JMM, Hopkins

Not included: Floyd (somewhat lacking power), Manny (not very good at pressure fighting), GGG (never really seen him box). Doesn't mean they are worse fighters ofc.

[b00g13man]

Wow!!!! Is this the real life?

[removed]

To me, Rigondeaux is the only boxer that looks completely unbeatable.

[King_]

I wouldn't question that they have boxing ability. You used their respective amateur pedigrees to back up your reasoning that they are complete fighters because of the amount of bouts they'd won (I'll assume you referred to Golovkin with the 300+ comment).

When I asked if Broner was also a complete fighter 'cause he has 300 amateur wins you said it was about the level of opposition fought rather than the volume.

So that's where the Khan question came in. Mario Kindelan was about the highest level of opposition you could hope to face in a vest. Khan has a win over him and an Olympic silver medal to boot. That's more than Sergey achieved and matches the top honour that Golovkin has.

So following your line of reasoning asking if Khan would also be considered a complete fighter is, well . . . perfectly reasonable.

No it's not.... It's the complete opposite of the point I'm making. Khan is known for his "boxing ability," already.


The Khan thing doesn't make sense.


Have you ever heard the phrase in the amateurs.... "his style is better suited for the pros."


Kovalev and GGG have a completely different style then Khan, and the point I was making was they have good boxing ability as well- you don't win decisions in the amateurs against good fighters (while being a come forward/aggressive fighter in the pros) without being a good boxer.


If you get what I'm saying