Best offensive fighters of all time

Best offensive fighters of all time. The obvious ones who come to mind:

Robinson
Louis
Duran
Tyson
Foreman
Arguello
Ezzard Charles
Hearns
Napoles
Chavez
Pryor
Pac
Trinidad
Chocolatito

Who else?

I don't think it's wrong at all to place Chocolatito on this list. He's gonna eventually go down as one of the better offensive fighters ever.

 

All those White Defensive Genius, eh ::

 

Before I contribute a list I must get the following question answered:

How are we defining offensive?

I ask the question because I'm somewhat surprised to see Foreman on the list.

 

If Foreman is on the list then you should put Marciano, Benn, Hamed, Jackson as well. So I need a definition.

 

Norris
Corrales
Mayweather (From 130-140 especially)
Jackson
Jones
Curry
Rosario

 

Agreed. There were many fights in Foremans early years, particularly the Jimmy Young fight and both fights with Gregorio Peralta which suggest his offense was not all that it could have been.

That's 1970 to 1977, approximately, a fairly wide spread over his early career.

Then there is the total offensive failure in Zaire in 1974.

He lost to Tommy Morrison, probably lost to Axel Schulz and split-decisioned Lou Savarese and came close to flooring none of them ::

Savarese got blown out by shot Mike, shitty Izon, decent Kirk Johnson, was dropped twice by inept Mike Grant. Tommy got blown out by Bentt and Mercer and Lewis.

Then there is the Zaire-esque collapse vs Alex Steward where he failed to get rid of his man despite having him badly hurt and generated almost no offense as the fight wore on.

Great, huge power, sure, but reliable consistent offense, with regards to Foreman, is limited to a brace of fights with Frazier {always easy to hit and hurt, and damaged goods as early as 1973, and totally shot by 1976} Norton and Lyle.

 

Great offensive fighters is taken to mean, prima facie, guys who got a lot of KO's or who had a lot of power.

I say bullshit to that for a definition.

Roy shouldn;t be on the list but Ray Robinson should.

Hamed should not be on the list but Marciano should.

Foreman should not be on the list but Frazier should.

 

I agree Irish. I don't get X's list at all. It seems like he's using inconsistent criteria. It's almost as though he created this thread while being high or drunk.

 

I think he could be a smug racist.Smells like a smug racist list ::

Surely Frazier, shot to shit in 1975, and half-blinded by Ali in Manila, managing to still get at and hurt the Champ in The Thriller counts for a better, more sustained offense than the crud Foreman offered in Zaire, himself still a fresh undamaged fighter, barely 1 year before :dunno:

 

A good offensive fighter:

1. Goes on the offensive more often than not, preferably all the time.

2. Tries to hurt his opponent and get them out of there as a preferred course of action.

3. Throws with intent.

4. Is able to attack and does attack and able to cause damage when they attack.

Troy Dorsey liked to go on the attack but had no power. Wayne McCullough, ditto.

Marciano came forward, had a clever attack, could get inside, had the power to end fights when he landed and could "throw the switch" when the situation demanded it.

Examples: First and second Walcott fights, Second Charles fight where he had 3 mins to get it done.

I would have Gatti down as a better offensive fighter than Hamed. The fact that he fought better guys than Hamed should not detract from his having a better offense.

 

Anyway my definition of offensive prowess which I call "Punishment delivery system" is the ability to deliver punishment to an opponent and it involves a combination of speed, power, accuracy, two-fisted power and large repertoire of punches.

Based on this criteria, which is the only way to look at it IMO, here's my list:

Louis
Tyson
Robinson
Trinidad
Chavez
Duran
Pacquiao
130-140lb Mayweather
GGG
Chocolatito
Arguello

 

I don't have the following fighters on the list because they usually hurt opponents with only one hand or even just one punch:

hearns
Hagler
De la Hoya
Frazier
Ruddock

I don't include the following because they missed as much as they connected:

Foreman
Benn
Marciano

I don't include the following because they relied on one bomb at a time and didn't really string accurate punches together in sequence

Jackson
McClellan
Hamed

 

Henry Armstrong should be in there. Guy threw too many punches not to be in there. Ditto Greb..............albeit to a lesser extent.

Here's the thing......Greb put Tunney in hospital with a broken face, but Dempsey unloaded a salvo on Tunney and got dropped himself soon after.

Yet Dempsey is remembered as an offensive machine and Greb is remembered as a middling-middleweight.

 

Marciano belongs. I should have included him.

Kov and GGG arguably belong one day.

 

Marciano belongs because he fulfills the criteria, he went on the offense, sustained it, turned fights around with it and caused damage with it.

 

Again...depends on what the criteria is. The criteria should be what he that they call the Sly One laid out.

 

This is not a list of PUNCHERS, btw. Not every puncher in history is a great offensive fighter. Benn, Shavers, Tua, Danny Lopez, great punchers... but NOT great offensive fighters.

Chavez, Duran.... not all time great punchers, but all time great offensive fighters.

SOME are both though. Like Tyson, and Louis... great punchers AND great offensive fighters.

 

You can't knock a guy for throwing 800 punches and landing only 400.

 

Question for you (since you didn't answer it when i first posed it):

What is your fucking criteria for being labelled a good offensive fighter?

 

It's not that hard. Basically, which fighters in history most EFFECTIVELY implemented a devastating offense.

Technique isn't a criteria. For instance, neither Foreman nor Marciano had great technique, yet both were great offensive fighters.

 

Foreman doesn't belong on the list. Check out my criteria and list.

 

Your criteria was created so a certain somebody could make the list.

 

It's kinda absurd that Floyd would make the list over say, Leonard.

I dunno in what world Floyd was a better offensive fighter than Leonard, but it ain't in this world.

 

I can take mayweather off the list to make you feel better. But my point is that great offensive fighters have a large punch variety and are accurate.

Joe Louis and Mike Tyson are the perfect examples. I don't see how Foreman or Hearns could be on the list.

 

If you're going by Foreman's accuracy, during his first reign he damn sure wasn't no Arguello in accuracy.

However, he wasn't lacking in punch variety.

 

Floyd was a very good offensive fighter at 130.

One of the top 10 all time best offensive fighters though? No.

Top 5 all time defensive fighter, sure. But not offensive.

 

Foreman was a monster of power and heavy hands but he looked like an old woman swinging frying pans.

 

That's fine...my mistake for including him.

Still I think when we speak of offensive talent we must be talking about accuracy, repertoire, speed, power, timing, ability to hurt with either hand combination.

To be on the list you have to have all of that criteria.

 

Ok. For once, I'll give it to you and admit you have a point. Foreman might not belong.