Is it useful to make a distinction between these two intangibles? I think of chin as the ability to take single shots, while durability is the ability to take sustained punishment. Two obviously related abilities but thinking about the difference between say Tyson & Frazier illustrates a distinction in my mind. Thoughts?
Agreed. Heavyweights these days tend to have chin, most of them plenty of chins actually, but they lack durability, so there is a distinction. Seriously, I think you are absolutely right here. What I started to think was that how often a guy has a good chin but can not take it to the body, or do they usually go hand-to-hand
The Tyson-Frazier Analogies R Spot-On...But Having Said that, REED Thinks Tyson had the CAPACITY for Durability, he just Lacked the MENTAL Fortitude to Wade Thru Whatever it Took to Win... Frazier was More DETERMINED, More MENTALLY TOUGH & Therefore More DURABLE... REED
Hagler had both (although his durability wasn't ever really tested per se because he never had to take a beating). Louis had better durability than he had chin as did Marciano to an extent. Eubank had HEART HEART and more HEART but seemed to have a better chin than durability.
Corrales definitely had no chin, but he was tough. Gatti had a somewhat overrated chin, due to his extreme durability.
Gatti's a weird example regarding chin. He seemed fairly easy to initially hurt or drop, which makes you question a fighter's chin, but once he got hurt, he seemed to get used to getting hit and then he'd take them better. Of course some of that is heart and determination but lots of fighters are determined yet they lose their senses after taking shot after shot to the face.
Lewis seems to me like a guy with good durability but a mediocre chin. Norton probably stands out as the ultimate example. Could take Ali, Holmes or Young's shots from here to doomsday but big punchers would end him every time.
Agreed. Norton fits the description. poor poor Ali...he had to deal with quite a few durable sons of bitches didn't he?
The more I think about examples on the other side the more I think maybe I was wrong - guys with a lack of durability are really just guys with a lack of heart or stamina. :dunno:
There is a difference. Chin is yes, the ability to take single shots, durability is the abillity to take sustained punishment. For example, a fighter might not have the best chin, and can get taken out with 1 shot, but as long as he was fighting someone who doesn't punch that hard, he could withstand 12 rounds of volume punching, no problem. Likewise, someone who is very difficult to hurt with single shots can be worn down (Tyson for example). Where as some fighters can be hurt or dropped with single shots - but the cumulative effect of punches don't have that much effect. Barrera is one example of that, only Pacman was able to wear him down. Most fighters do tend to have both or neither though. Lewis and Norton are two good examples too. Funnily enough, even though there is a clear difference between the two, I can't seem to think of many examples where a fighter had one and not the other.
Which leads me to think durability is really just a function of stamina & heart, rather than a separate intangible. I mean Tyson lacked durability, really because he lacked the focus and heart to rally back into fights he was losing. Corrie Sanders took a good shot but had shit stamina. And im sure any other examples of guys we could think of who took a good shot but could be worn down would just be lacking in either stamina or heart/focus too. And while I'm here, rambling at 2am about such trivial nonsense I'll also say - focus is a big component of heart. The ability to come back from adversity and turn fights around is as dependent on that as bravery.
Focus seems to be a big component of chin too btw. For example Lewis took big hooks from many guys and didn't go anywhere but got blasted out by single shots when his concentration was not there. I disagree with heart being the same as conditioning, btw
