me·thod·i·cal /məˈTHädək(ə)l/ adjective done according to a systematic or established form of procedure. "a methodical approach to the evaluation of computer systems" This is my favorite type of fighter. Who fits the bill? Hagler and McCallum come to mind for me. Which fighters would you say are decidedly not methodical?
I think we can see from the answers people all have slightly different connotations with the word..... but Chavez best fits what it brings to mind for me.
If I understand the term correctly, Wlad is extremely methodical. His method wasn't very likeable though
John Ruiz even more so....like a mob extortion racket : carefully methodical, with blind-eye policing a vital component
I wouldn't call Ruiz methodical, he was an opportunist (not in a pejorative way) whose method was quite archaic imo. Riddick Bowe would be an example of a methodical fighter
to me, the opposite of methodical in boxing would be improvisational. i agree with everyone who says chavez. i think jmm too was methodical.
Yeah, Tyson's style wasn't improvisational. Jones would be the best example of the opposite of methodical. Jung Koo Chang is another prime example.
Chang is an absolutely perfect example of a highly-skilled instinctive fighter rather than a methodical one. Someone like Laguna or Zapata are in that same boat. Ali too, really. I've always thought Arguello's methodicism was to his detriment in the long run. Louis too, to a lesser degree. It got both of them dropped by well timed shots from fighters they oughtn't have been dropped by (eg; Ganigan/Galento).
Barney Ross I think fits the bill from what I've seen on film whereas his great rival Tony Canzoneri clearly doesn't.
Hard one.......Vitali was an unorthodox methodical guy. He did the same thing differently all the time In that he came forward, tried to hold the center of the ring with his hands down throwing arm-shots and backed up throwing weird counter pot-shots anytime anyone tried to rush him. Same plan, everytime, done in a different way.
Yeah but was he methodical? I would say he was but he had no set routine. It was all still method fighting If he was behind on the cards, he had no real explosiveness to dig himself out. So he never fell behind on the cards. Towards the end he spent most of the fights backing up but it was still methodical backing up....Chisora, Arreola, that Syrian bum Gunter Love or whatever...all backing up. Compare that to say.........Naz. Naz method was to have no method.
interesting because i see hopkins as more improvisational and reactive. he is methodical in the sense he seems to think strategically and exploits his opponents' weaknesses. but i don't see him go in there and kind of follow a repretoire
Myung Woo Yuh was methodical. In fact, in many ways, Yuh was a mini-Chavez in style. Not as good as Chavez, but a great fighter nonetheless.
It seems most agree that well ingrained fundamentals lead to methodicism. Knowing when to break the rules and abandon those rigid fundamental laws is the sign of a true, genuine master IMO. Take for instance, a fight brought up recently here. Jones vs Hall. Jones didn't do what conventional wisdom says to do vs a tall southpaw. He moved straight into the line of the left hand, and brought it closer to him so he could counter it without Hall seeing. Knowing how that would've played out is a perfect example of a fighter using their own experience over their fundamental teachings. However, Jones also knew the danger of this as it got him dropped vs Lou, and stopped vs Tarver.
When I think of methodical I think of fighters such as: Joe Louis Harold Johnson Carlos Ortiz Eder Jofre Alexis Arguello Carlos Zarate Ricardo Lopez
