Your fifteen most talented fighters of the past thirty years...

Dude, you forgot Sanchez. The biggest natural of them all.

 

marcellus johnson only mentioned once, and not among the initial 15.


you guys dont know nothin bout boxin!

 

Jake you must have forgotten to read my list; it's perfectly appropriate and demonstrates a keen understanding of what is meant by, "talented."

Seriously, though, I think we have to all agree that while it's certainly a topic worthy of debate, there can never be a true consensus on the definition of talent.

To me, speed has something to do with it, but so does timing, so does the ability to put punches together, the ability to knock opponents out.

I think there's education involved, but I think at the highest level of the sport, only those with talent can put it all together seamlessly enough to have success.

 

Yeah I did. I guess put him in place of Hearns.

I shoulda also put Tito in my honorable mentions. Despite being overrated like a muthafucka in his prime, at 147-154 he was a great talent.

 

In most people's mind - pretty much.

 

talent is the natural ability to succeed in the fight game: combination of hit and not get hit, chin, stamina.

By this definition, the correct one, you eliminate the need to include fighters that are just fast and flashy.

 

I was disappointed by your exclusion of Castillo, whereas UGBK at least had the sense to remember Fast Fres Oquendo. Not sure how you think your list can compete.

 

What factors contributing to success aren't talents? :dunno:

 

But seriously, I do have a question...

while I realize it's not a "Best of..." list of the past 30 years, was just curious on those who list fighters who were very talented in the '70s but only for a couple of years from '81 on (since it's the last 30 years).

Do you take into consideration what that fighter was prior to '81 and combine it with the specified timeline, or just take a hard look from 1981-2011?

Not really looking to argue that any answer is right or wrong, just generally curious of the criteria others use to compile their lists.

 

No order

Pac
Floyd
DLH
RJJ
Pryor
Calzaghe
Lewis
Duran
Tyson
Hamed
DeGale
Hearns
Whitaker
Leonard
Martinez

 

Others such as Arguello, Mosley, Hopkins, Douglas, Chavez would be in my top 20

 

Having Calzaghe & Hamed above Arguello & Hopkins is deranged.

 

If anyone cares I think the best way to do these is to just include guys who won their first world title in the time period given. I'd bend the rules for Leonard and make it 'first title defence' or some shit, to include him since he's barely 6 weeks out.

 

Why? Joe didn't lose to Taylor twice. :dunno:

 

'Lose'. Aged 40. Calzaghe has the worst resume of any 'ATG'. Ever.

A contentious win over a 42 year old is his best win by far. Prime Hopkins fucks Calzaghe up.

 

The topic is about talent, not resumes.

 

No he doesn't.

Also, if we are talking talent here and not resume, then I would also have Calzaghe ahead of Hopkins.

 

Hopkins in the late 90s, early 00s was a much, much better fighter than Joe Calzaghe. Resumes are how you prove talent anyway, you can't separate the two.

 

Insane.

 

Not really. They both had long reigns over shit divisions and then Hopkins moved ahead resume-wise by beating a few bigger names at 175. People have this notion that a younger Bernard would "beat the shit" out of Calzaghe because he scored a flash knockdown and Adelaide Byrd can't score a fight. It wasn't THAT close. 116-111. There was nothing in that fight which made me think young B-Hop beats Calzaghe, who was no spring chicken himself.

 

calyayghe fought will mcIntyre.

in a title defense.

this cannot be justified.

if you can find me a title challenger on hopkins dossier who was shut out by the likes of dana rosenblatt i will foot the bill for catering charges of the next joe king family reunion.

 

Calzaghe sucked.

 

Let's not exaggerate now.

I don't believe Calzaghe had more talent than Hopkins, but they are pretty equivalent.

However, no way can a sane person say that Calzaghe "sucked". That's ridiculous.

 

I don't believe he knows how to spell IQ

 

Ricardo Lopez, 1-15...heh.

 

Good question. And it's something I also had in mind.

Case in point are guys like Whitaker and Duran.

Whitaker did his best work in the 80's, while Duran did his in the 70's. In a list of, say, "Most talented of the past 20 years (1990-2010)", Whitaker still deserves to make the list. Talent is one major barometer why, even in a past-prime capacity, he still able to achieve significant things (such as beating Chavez and, arguably also beating a prime DLH) in the 90's. Same for Duran. In a thirty year span (1980-2010), for that win over Ray alone bordering the 80's and 70's, I think he qualifies, even if his truly best years came in the 1970's as a lightweight. There are other criteria and intangibles of course. But just saying.

 

Dammit. I said "In no particular order." ::

 

Talent is not limited to physical ability, I think, although it certainly is the most visible and obvious manifestation.

One consideration is natural aptitude for boxing that may not necessarily be tied to the conventional hallmarks of athleticism like speed, agiility, etc... I mean, MAB may not be as gifted physically as Benitez, but like Wilfred, he's an acknowledged prodigy of the sport. And to some considerable degree, it also shows.

Ring technicians are another case.

Highly skilled fighters may also be (at the same time) very talented, even if their skill (at first) may undermine and supercede their physical ability. Guys like JMM, Hopkins, are both supreme craftsmen, but it took awhile for us to recognize just how talented they are for the reason that other variables (such as the ability to hone skill enabling one to effectively compete at a considerable disadvantage at heigher weights and at an older age) necessary for us to validate their natural gifts still weren't apparent at earlier stages of their careers.

 

He's about 60% as good as people think he was. He basically out hustled an old man with fitness and that was his best career win.

His career path SUCKED, his style SUCKED and in the scheme of the way people rate him now he fucking SUCKED.

 

I seriously defy anyone to draw the useful conceptual line between 'talent' and 'ability' which justifies this thread.