Who is the msot technically perfect active fighter?

[McGrain]

In your opinion?

[boxbox]

forgot my basics...

[Kojiro]

In your opinion?

PBF obviously. :deal

[Senya13]

FMJr

[Maxime]

Bernard Hopkins

[thunder06]

pbf.

[psychopath]

Wake up people . . . there's no such thing as technically perfect fighter. All fighters have flaws . . . reason why all fighters gets bruises, lumps, marked face or even bloodied.

That should be repraised to "close to being perfect".:hey

:D

[McGrain]

All you guys picking Mayweather - what is it about his footwork/head movement/glove positioning that you find technically perfect?

Very, very efficient and effective but you won't find it in any manual.

Some of the other calls are great though.

[McGrain]

Wake up people . . . there's no such thing as technically perfect fighter. All fighters have flaws . . . reason why all fighters gets bruises, lumps, marked face or even bloodied.


"Most technically perfect".

I think that's pretty straigt forward, even though it doesn't make a huge amount of sense.

I'm not suggesting a technically perfect fighter exsists, just starting a conversation about technical excellence in active fighters.

[McGrain]

I know exactly what you're saying. Guys like Mayweather, Hopkins, and James Toney have a very wide and varied bag of tricks but a lot of what they do is old school, and old school techniques are unconventional and aren't what I consider good basic technical boxing.

Good basic boxing consists of a proper defensive guard, having a good jab, knowing how to deliver every punch in you arsenal with mastery, kowing how to bang both to the head and body, good fluid combinations, knowing how to both come forward and lay back and counter, etc., etc. All those things and more are what makes a great technical fighter.

Well said; though I wouldn't put Hopkins in with Toney and Mayweather. I also think fluidity isn't neccesary for near-technical perfection, but this is an excellent post...

The guys picking Mayweather, i'm intrigued - why? Care to explain your position?

[DonPrestige]

Wake up people . . . there's no such thing as technically perfect fighter. All fighters have flaws . . . reason why all fighters gets bruises, lumps, marked face or even bloodied.

That should be repraised to "close to being perfect".:hey

:D

MOST technically perfect damn, read before before you try to be a smart arse.



PBF

[VIP]

Winky Wright is up there. Punching technique straight from the textbooks.

[hooligan]

LOL nobodys perfect!!!!

best technically would be much appropriate i should say and thats pbf for sure, second would be that guy who ktfo darchinyan.

[McGrain]

Winky Wright is up there. Punching technique straight from the textbooks.

For punching I think you are absolutley right.

Damn!, still loads of guys picking PBF without saying why!

[psychopath]

MOST technically perfect damn, read before before you try to be a smart arse.



PBF

Hey fuck you newbie . . . i know how to read shit head. Is there an "arse" word in the dictionary?

Now you shut the fuck up.:-(

[psychopath]

"Most technically perfect".

I think that's pretty straigt forward, even though it doesn't make a huge amount of sense.

I'm not suggesting a technically perfect fighter exsists, just starting a conversation about technical excellence in active fighters.

Yeah I dig yah . . . I'll say Rafa Marquez. The guy is an old school fighter who is very efficient and with power in both hands.

[Napoleon]

Bernard Hopkins

:good :good :good :good :good

[DonPrestige]

Hey fuck you newbie . . . i know how to read shit head. Is there an "arse" word in the dictionary?

Now you shut the fuck up.:-(



Haha, well first, why didnt you read it then before making that stupid comment.

Second, you joined 3 months ago so I guess were both newbies.

Thirdly, arse is an english term, you know the language you're trying to speak. You may forget but the word you would probably use ass is derived from it and with all the swearing Iid grab a thesaurus to go with a dictionary.

[Terrible Terry]

The Marquez brothers are little boxing machines, for my money they are the most technically skilled fighters in the sport.

[McGrain]

The Marquez brothers are little boxing machines, for my money they are the most technically skilled fighters in the sport.

Which one do you think is technically superior?

[psychopath]

Haha, well first, why didnt you read it then before making that stupid comment.

Second, you joined 3 months ago so I guess were both newbies.

Thirdly, arse is an english term, you know the language you're trying to speak. You may forget but the word you would probably use ass is derived from it and with all the swearing Iid grab a thesaurus to go with a dictionary.

Nah . . . nah . . . nah . . . that's not a stupid comment. You're stupid. "Most technically perfect"? Is there such a thing? The author of the thread admitted that it doesn't make a sense and explained what he meant. :yep That does it so I replied logically.

Yes shithead you grab a thesaurus and tell me what if you can find a word "arse". :lol:

The only "Arse" in the dictionary is . . . A'res, the Greek God of war.
Who's the "smart ass" now? :yep

[Marciano Frazier]

Mayweather isn't really "technically perfect" at all. He's pretty unorthodox. I'd go with someone like Hopkins or Wright.

[DonPrestige]

Nah . . . nah . . . nah . . . that's not a stupid comment. You're stupid. "Most technically perfect"? Is there such a thing? The author of the thread admitted that it doesn't make a sense and explained what he meant. :yep That does it so I replied logically.

Yes shithead you grab a thesaurus and tell me what if you can find a word "arse". :lol:

The only "Arse" in the dictionary is . . . A'res, the Greek God of war.
Who's the "smart ass" now? :yep


As we're checking the dictionary now

arse: • noun Brit. vulgar slang a person’s bottom

source-[Only registered and activated users can see links]


I am assuming you were using an american dictionary to try and prove your point about an English word which would mean you're even more idiotic than I first thought.

So I guess you're the ass, haha. I'm really trying not to be smug but its so difficult.

ass:• noun North American form of ARSE ([Only registered and activated users can see links])
Source -[Only registered and activated users can see links]

[lefthook31]

Right now Floyd Mayweather shows the best all around skills as a fighter. There isnt too many other guys that have what he does. Maybe Winky Wright and Bernard Hopkins, and Shane Mosley, they are all technically sound fighters.

[ozziebattler]

All you guys picking Mayweather - what is it about his footwork/head movement/glove positioning that you find technically perfect?

Very, very efficient and effective but you won't find it in any manual.

Some of the other calls are great though.

Once again a internet nerd who dont know shit bouy boxing...

You dont learn to box through a MANUAL.

I dont like mayweather but he seems to be doing alright dont you reckon..???hasnt lost and dont like losing anytime soon..

And their aint no such thing as technically perfect...boxers aint robots you know ppl??

too many nerds who havent laced a glove in their life on this website..

[4Rounder]

The Marquez brothers are little boxing machines, for my money they are the most technically skilled fighters in the sport.

I completely agree. Juan Manuel Marquez specially is the better boxer of the two and I could even say that he is a better fighter than PBF.

[doublesuited]

Jose Navarro
Ivan Calderon
Marco Antonio Barrera
Bernard Hopkins
Rafael Marquez
Juan Manuel Marquez
Juan Diaz

[Imperial1]

Bhops

Floyd Mayweather

Marco Antonio Barrera

[DoumB]

Bernard Hopkins is close to that.

[koko of phil]

JMM suits.

[PH|LLA]

Hopkins by a landslide

[*BOX_FAN*]

Ronald "Winky" Wright

[Pimp C]

Calderon
Hopkins
JMM
PBF
Wright

[Johnnyblaze]

I have a couple

Hopkins-He does everything right. In my opinion, he dosen't do anything spectacular. He just does everything textbook and that's why he has had such great sucess.

Floyd-His style isn't textbook, but he has mastered his technique. Especially his defense. His "shoulder roll" defense is the best i've ever seen.

Winky-Hands up, pinpoint accurate jabs that he uses for offense and defense. Just like Hopkins, nothing spectacular, just does everything right.

[codeman99998]

Well said; though I wouldn't put Hopkins in with Toney and Mayweather. I also think fluidity isn't neccesary for near-technical perfection, but this is an excellent post...

The guys picking Mayweather, i'm intrigued - why? Care to explain your position?
Here is a defense for Mayweather (I pretty much think Raf Marquez is the absolute best technically, but here it goes.)

Not all techniques are the same. Just because no one teaches the philly shell in a boxing 101 textbook does not mean it is a technically flawed approach, just a different one. James Toney was not exactly a prime physical specimen ever since he left middleweight, but he still used those techniques to pull out victories.

PBF is not RJJ. RJJ relied on outstanding physical abilities to win fights with a total lack of any really solid technique. Floyd supplements his amazing technique with outstanding physical abilities.

Floyd's defense allows him to stand right in front of you and he dodges/deflects most of your punches. It is not purely athletic talent that is doing it, but skill in his defensive techniques.

There is more than one way to fight. Some fighters appear to have "poor" footwork, but they win almost all of their fights. Perhaps the reason is because their "poor" footwork is allowing them to get maximum leverage on all of their punches, but it limits their mobility.

Some fighters may have a "poor" stance, with their hands not necessarily held high. But perhaps their stance is allowing them to more effectively punch from different angles, or counterpunch with more power.

Some fighters may have "poor punching form", but perhaps their form allows them to significantly increase their punch output.

Pretty Boy Floyd's style will not be found in any boxing 101 book, but he has totally and completely mastered it. While he may not be "the most perfect" at "how a fighter should fight" he certainly has mastered doing what he does very well, and he clearly gets substantial advantages over his opponent by doing what he does. Floyd would not be as good of a fighter if he was fighting from the boxing 101 textbook.

*edit* On an unrelated note, I see absolutely no way that anyone can say Winky Wright is the most technically perfect. Every time that guy goes into fight his gloves are so big they are like SHIELDS. He only throws straight punches (not exactly the sign of a fighter with a full arsenal.) He has a great physical advantage because his forearms are so big compared to his chest that he is able to completely cover up almost every inch of his body any time he wants to. A boxing novice can be tought how to fight like Winky Wright (obviously he wouldn't become a boxing champion because he doesn't have the experience or the physical advantages) in about 20 minutes. The guy is near unbeatable, but skilled?

Just because you win fights without knocking out your opponent doesn't make you skilled.

[Vantage_West]

joel casamayor should get a good mention...can throw every punch correctly has great movement and technique

[igotJUIC3]

i think you should have used Most well rounded SKILLED fighter instead of technical...technical is such a broad term.

Without a doubt though PBF is the most well rounded skilled fighter today.

[brooklyn1550]

Juan Manuel Marquez

[igotJUIC3]

Alot of people would disagree with you. Floyd at 130 & 135 was one of the most well rounded fighters. Now he has become a "one and done" type of fighter. He also lacks power. When was the last time Floyd actually threw a combo? Gatti?

good point about power and coombo's....very good point cant argue that....but like you said he is out his weight class really so he does have power just not at these weights and thats the same for combos to i think but i see your point.

[Tettsuo]

B-Hop and Floyd... and just a mention for Winky.

In Floyd's defense, his punching technique is perfect, along with his footwork which is also extremely good. You can check out his recent match against Judah (after he switched up tactics) and see where he's using just basic technique to beat on Judah noggin'. He cuts off the ring extremely well. His defense my seem unorthodox if you're only looking at his torso, but his footwork is totally correct. The only thing I don't like are his leaping left hooks. Left hooks are best when you're firmly planted on the ground.

BHop does everything perfect. He even cheats perfectly. He needs to do it all very well to makeup for his lack of outstanding power and speed.

Winky punches very well, but I don't like his wide stance. I understand he needs such a wide stance to absorb punches, but it also forces him to plod forward. I also don't like his lack of commitment to his punches. But again, I understand that he needs to do that so he can get his guard up quickly. So I'm on the fence regarding Winky.

[Koa]

Technically perfect, now that would depend on the fighters style or it would depend on how the fighter throws punches, stands, recovers, holds his guard, parries, bobs, weaves, blocks, guards etc.

IMO there are many styles out there that work extremely well if used correctly and by the right type of fighter, in conjunction with things mentioned up top. Some guys have great quickness, so utilizing a lead left hook which would be a deffinate no no for many fighters would actually be a great weapon to be used technically for certain styles which take into consideration great quickness. Accuracy and athleticism and chin are other aspects. James Toney in his prime was one of those guys who could take a jab or a cross for example and set up combinations off of taking certain punches to land his own.

This being said I really like James Toney, Floyd, MAB, Marquez's, a prime Forrest, and of all people Kessler. You can take a look at how successful fighters are as they age.. Once youth is out the door, technique is what tends to carry fighters into their mid to later years. Fighters need to utilize the correct style of fighting with technique in order to have successful careers. If you utilize techniques which play into your natural abilities extremely well, then you are going to have a successful career.

So yeah, guys like BHOP and Barrera are extremely cerebral fighters, who's styles are based on what other fighters do. BHOP is a master at remembering patterns in his opposition, pulling the trigger at the right moment, finding openings. I think Barrera is similar but more offensively oriented when he is fighting at his best. JMM is in this category as well.

Wright is based off of defense, pressure and chin.

Forrest imo has the perfect counter style to quick fighters.. I think if there were a prime version of him around today he would have the bane style to Floyd Mayweather, working off the jab and big cross, controlling range.

[sues2nd]

Its Hopkins....by a mile.

Floyd is great....but his defensive style is anything but textbook.

[McGrain]

You dont learn to box through a MANUAL.

I know that, but thanks.

My point wasn't that the guys i'm talking about actually get a MANUAL and start reading.

My point was that there is a technically perfect way of throwing a jab, for example.

I dont like mayweather but he seems to be doing alright dont you reckon..???hasnt lost and dont like losing anytime soon..

I do like him. Do you think i'm attacking him by calling him less than technically perfect? Why do you think that?

Ali, Roy Jones, there are many great fighters who are not technically excellent in many departments.

And their aint no such thing as technically perfect...boxers aint robots you know ppl??

I think this has been covered earlier in the thread.

But thanks for pointing out to us all that fighters aren't robots.

too many nerds who havent laced a glove in their life on this website..

Maybe you should find somewhere else to post if you don't like it.

I've boxed. Not going to be a world champ of anything, but i've done it. WTF has that got to with a chat about tecnical boxing?

[McGrain]

Here is a defense for Mayweather (I pretty much think Raf Marquez is the absolute best technically, but here it goes.)

Not all techniques are the same. Just because no one teaches the philly shell in a boxing 101 textbook does not mean it is a technically flawed approach, just a different one. James Toney was not exactly a prime physical specimen ever since he left middleweight, but he still used those techniques to pull out victories.

Good points.

From the point of view of deploying techniques as perfectly as possible though, Toney is a difficult example - maybe the most difficult. But I agree with your basic point.

PBF is not RJJ. RJJ relied on outstanding physical abilities to win fights with a total lack of any really solid technique. Floyd supplements his amazing technique with outstanding physical abilities.

I think PBF gets away with the hands low shoulder roll because of his astonishing athletecism in the same way that RJJ would. I do think that Floyd's basics are more sound than Roy's.



Floyd's defense allows him to stand right in front of you and he dodges/deflects most of your punches. It is not purely athletic talent that is doing it, but skill in his defensive techniques.

Yes. The difference is that a technically perfect defensive roll will be just as effective when he is 45 and all his speed is gone, whereas what he does now is reliant on his speed. You know? That is why Hopkins is such a great example of near-technical perfection - he's over 40 and it's hurt him much less than his contemparies (Tarver, Johnson, Jones).

There is more than one way to fight. Some fighters appear to have "poor" footwork, but they win almost all of their fights. Perhaps the reason is because their "poor" footwork is allowing them to get maximum leverage on all of their punches, but it limits their mobility.

Well they are different facets of technique (IMO) - one is leverage via positioning, the other is footwork related to mobility. I believe it is possible to do both well so I wouldn't look to a fighter getting great leverage because of his poor mobility as an example of great technique when it is possible (Dempsey, Sanchez, Barrera) to achieve both.


*edit* On an unrelated note, I see absolutely no way that anyone can say Winky Wright is the most technically perfect. Every time that guy goes into fight his gloves are so big they are like SHIELDS. He only throws straight punches (not exactly the sign of a fighter with a full arsenal.) He has a great physical advantage because his forearms are so big compared to his chest that he is able to completely cover up almost every inch of his body any time he wants to. A boxing novice can be tought how to fight like Winky Wright (obviously he wouldn't become a boxing champion because he doesn't have the experience or the physical advantages) in about 20 minutes. The guy is near unbeatable, but skilled?

Just because you win fights without knocking out your opponent doesn't make you skilled.


Excellent post. Interesting stuff about Winky. I partially agree. I think that the punches he does throw are tecnhically near perfect though.

[Amsterdam]

Bernard Hopkins

+1

1. Bernard
2. JMM
3. Mayweather(speed and natural gifts allow for mistakes).

[codeman99998]

Excellent post. Interesting stuff about Winky. I partially agree. I think that the punches he does throw are tecnhically near perfect though.

Absolutely. Winky has one of the best jab/straight left combos in boxing. I'd never take that away from him. The truth is, he might have the best hook/uppercuts too, I've just NEVER seen him throw them.

[S!F]

Bhop
Pbf

[Carlos Primera]

probably pbf. hopkins is textbook too does a little bit of everything. jmm is well rounded too imo

[JMotrain]

Hopkins and it aint even close.

[carras]

hops
winky
calderon
JMM
ODLH

[Stinky gloves]

Guys, PBF is not active, he is retired.