thats a pretty dumb question if you ask me
Can the "slick" style be beaten?
Collapse
-
When I think of "slick" styles I think of Floyd, Judah, maybe Lara. Slippery, backpeddling. Usually boring to watch.
When people start including Hopkins (who has a very dirty, confrontational, throwback style and relies on smothering) I just assume they mean "black". Cause he fights nothing like those guys.Last edited by ////; 04-19-2016, 04:22 AM.Comment
-
-
While Tito did beat Joppy, that was the fight in which I said, do not stay at 160 Tito as you will lose (to Hopkins) ... and he did. His power did not cross over well at that weight. Well, not to my liking at least. Maybe if he had a few more fights at 160, who knows.Tito needed to get set to deliver his power. Joppy was a good fighter who got hyped. Tito got hyped into a fight where he was Out gunned.
Plus bHop was too slick to sit on the ropes and let Tito get off. Bernard got off first and turned Tito when his back hit the ropes. Great stuff!
No way he was going to beat Hopkins. Hopkins was too solid and well rounded fighter.Comment
-
Very rarely agree with Reloaded, but you're spot on here
Its partially why I challenge the strange consensus on here that boxing is 'hit and not be hit'. It can be, but not necessarily. Sometimes you gotta take some punches to land a bomb (or more effective punch). Boxing is about winning in the boxing ring.
On top of that, theres no perfect fighter. Because fighters are human. Some fighters could be close, but never perfect. As its the fighters that obviously employ styles, it means there can also be no perfect style in practice. In theory you could argue all day, but you wouldn't be right (or wrong).Comment
-
Comment
-
Comment
-
-
Comment




Comment