Is it fair to say that both Joshua and Wilder are rare talents.

[Eff Pandas]

Sh^t man. There are something like 22,000 active pro boxers at any given time. There are 7 billion people on the planet. One could argue that anyone who's top 5 in their division is a rare talent.

[juggernaut666]

Here for the MENTALLY challenged on here one more time.

talent
[tal-uh nt]

noun
1.
a special natural ability or aptitude:
a talent for drawing.
2.
a capacity for achievement or success; ability:
young men of talent.


Wilder is actually a prime example of how one does not need talent, but PHYSICAL attributes to be successful. He's got big power and huge reach, that is enough for him to be champ.

Where say someone hundersized and underpowered, say Usyk at HW would


See how it has f@ck all to do with PHYSICAL ATTRIBUTES?

Aptitude and capacity for success, ability.

Big ****s with ****, long arms and height are not TALENT!

^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^

End thread above .....yes mentally challenged posters are never in short supply !

However this wont be end thread some idiot will challenge what you just posted anyway even though you outined it too !

[KingHippo]

I think Joshua is grossly overrated and nothing special. He's really the second coming of Frank Bruno. He looks the part, but he will get exposed eventually.

Wilder, on the other hand, while not being the most technically sound, is probably the best raw athlete to compete at heavyweight ever, and that's what makes him special.

[New England]

I guess I just disagree. This is not my definition of talent.

Of course no one born with any ability really, you have to learn everything.

Talent, in my definition, or how I've learned it is defined in the world that I live in, is a natural predisposition for something.

You have a talent for art because art comes to easy to you.

talent
[tal-uh nt]
Spell Syllables
Synonyms Examples Word Origin
See more synonyms on Thesaurus.com
noun
1.
a special natural ability or aptitude:
a talent for drawing.
2.
a capacity for achievement or success; ability:
young men of talent.


POWER is not a talent, some girls big **** are not a talent! Those are simply physical attributes. Lex Steel's **** is not a talent.

Is talent the new "afleet"?

Are we going to sit here and debate **** that is defined in the dictionary?

so having a predisposition for something, let's say punching hard, is a talent, but also not a talent?


whatever you learned in school [a man shouldn't require a dicitonary to define talent in his adulthood,] was apparently wrong.

talents are aptitudes with which you are born. like an aptitude toward being able to punch hard, what we call power in boxing. you cannot teach paulie malignaggi to punch hard. you can develop his power some, but he will never be a [natural / gifted] "puncher."

similarly with height, you don't teach that. how is a phsyical advantage [aptitude, natural ability] with which you were born not a talent in the definition you're providing? i mean really, how is a talent not a talent?


are speed and power not talents? are they not affected by one's natural ability to be fast or to punch hard?

if this sounds liek a silly talk it is because it is. you're trying to argue that talents are not talents under the very definition you're providing! it's awkward!


the basic components of talent in boxing are speed [what i call fleetness,] power [a component of strength but also determined by speed and coordination,] and your chin. you'll never turn david tua into michael dokes. you'll never turn paulie malignaggi into david tua. and that's because of genetic variation, or what we're calling "Talent" in the thread.


are punchers born or not?

[Banderivets]

^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^

End thread above .....yes mentally challenged posters are never in short supply !

However this wont be end thread some idiot will challenge what you just posted anyway even though you outined it too !

Yea man....

I remember spending numerous pages in a thread on "athleticism".....mfers trying to say how Olympic lifters aren't athletes and basketball players are...because you know...athleticism can only be defined by how high one can jump and how fast he can change direction.

[Banderivets]

so having a predisposition for something, let's say punching hard, is a talent, but also not a talent?

Bro...sorry but I didn't even bother reading.

The mic has been dropped on the previous page.

No more, "afleet" talk.

[juggernaut666]

Yea man....

I remember spending numerous pages in a thread on "athleticism".....mfers trying to say how Olympic lifters aren't athletes and basketball players are...because you know...athleticism can only be defined by how high one can jump and how fast he can change direction.

Arguing that height is a set talent that automatically transfers into SKILL , is as dumb as it gets !

Even for box scene thats all im getting at !


Olympic and strongman competitors are extremely athletic ,and its because they not only need to have certain genetics to do that type of sport but they also need abilities to lift objects properly !which is a talent in itself ....of course its also a different type of sport focused solely on strength training mainly .

[billeau2]

I just really got back and just saw this lol!

The reason the distinction is important is because it will demonstrate weakness and relative strengths of a fighter. As you go up the ladder if you can only do one thing, others can avoid it better...they are up the ladder for a reason and it is not being in front of a punch that they can see coming.

Nobody would question that a fighter who can throw more punches, fight at more ranges, has more experience has an advantage right? Those are all quantifiable attributes that make someone talented. Lets not confuse the issue either: Joshua is not necessarily deceptive, but that does not mean that watching him one cannot show a variety of things he does to show skills gained.

When we look at Joshua he has been developing in a different category than Wilder because he has been working at that level developing weapons... He has talent which he has developed from attributes he came to the game with.

Wilder is just getting to a stage where he can throw combinations and set up his punch from a jab. I don't blame Wilder either, the fact is instead of learning how to box he has to develop his punch and live and die in the ring by his punch. He came in late, does not really think like a boxer... If one were to say he has talent one would say he has a talent! He can punch hard...and as Jugs said, big men that punch hard do not necessarily make one say "oh how talented!" Correctly what we would say is that "my fighter has an attribute that we need to capitalize on." Call it a talent if you must...its still singular and something that Wilder came to the game with.

So...what is his ability? From a boxing perspective he has arrived to a place where he can make it so, that in a 12 round fight, with 3 minute rounds, he will get a certain amount or chances to unload his punch. He showed that against a talented fighter, on the decline, he could outlast and ultimately prevailed.

Does that take a great amount of talent? well it is not a real departure from where he started from...again I don't blame him either. I would do the same. He is a man with a hammer and you best be a nail! So far he is strong enough that he has prevailed, it was close and Ortiz gassed, but Wilder did show that he can use his attributes in that fight. What will Wilder do when a fighter is able to better avoid his big punch? What will Wilder do against a fighter who fights him inside? Ortiz, who was a great victory for Wilder, does not have the ability to make adjustments in the ring... Wilder will be fighting guys who will be able to make adjustments in the ring as he moves up the ladder.

Joshua is, a much more complete, fighter who also happens to be a big strong guy who can punch. this is the distinction some are making on the thread. If we watched both Wilder and Joshua and listed things they did during a fight, the list would look very different.

Thats the difference. We hear of guys like Shavers and Lyle...heavyweights that we would not call talented. These men could punch hard and could eventually count on finding a way to catch you a certain amount of times with that punch. That is Deontey's pedigree...

[uppercut510]

Mike Tyson used SKILLFUL counter puncher with GREAT speed and timing to set up the K.O's ...even later in his career he had the skills to box at high level.jesus you ppl are dumb as hell....

BEING BORN 6'7 DOESNT MAKE YOU TALENTED ,its what you do with that height LIKE a Vitali Klitchko Wlad or Lewis who were talented fighters that HAD height as well ...


Heres a question , i know a 6'6 pizza maker ....does he make good pizzas bc he was BORN tall ????? Hes talented right ? Got to be the reason .



billeau2 Please read this thread .........bail me out im losing IQ points too having to actually explain this....lol

a part of what makes wilder and Joshua decent fighters happen to be their size and physical advantages, the pizza maker makes good pizza because he does what the instructions say to do not sure what making pizza has to do with physical things anyway but u win bro

[juggernaut666]

a part of what makes wilder and Joshua decent fighters happen to be their size and physical advantages, the pizza maker makes good pizza because he does what the instructions say to do not sure what making pizza has to do with physical things anyway but u win bro

Exactly the Pizza maker needed ability to make quality pizza ,nothing to do with height . So you just mistakenly proved my point !