Maybe a better way to look at the thread question imo is a style you can't teach _anyone else_. Naz's unconventional style that worked for him was undone by Suarez, agreed.
Manny Steward was ALSO THERE, for Half a Second or 2...Not Sure Why Oscar Suarez Gets ALL the Blame for UNDOING Prince Naseem Hamed.... REED:dunno:
To me prime Naz was pretty much Herol Graham if you made Graham a short-ish featherweight in love with his power. Stylistically/technically Naz didn't really do much that Graham & various other Ingle stable fighters didn't do.
I think it was Suarez who did most the technical stuff with Naz and Steward would come in later in camp. Might be wrong. On the commentary in the Ingle fight there's talk about various stylistic changes Suarez specifically was working on.
He definitely took cues from Herol Graham's style, but Graham himself was kind of like a poor man's Ali.
Whether it came from Graham or Ingle I dunno but there was an 'Ingle style' that several guys from that camp shared. Naz wasn't traditional textbook for sure, but he was pretty much Ingle textbook!
But not unteachable He executes it better than most would, but he's not doing anything technically that hasn't been done before or will be done again
You could say the same thing for Jones though. Martinez does a poor man's Roy impression himself, Roy's style isn't technically unteachable, it's just nigh on impossible to have the athleticism and agility to pull it off the way Roy did. Pacquiao is more or less in the same camp for me.
Nah, he's an absolute textbook technician In the 40s and 50s, there were literally dozens of guys who fought like that Talent is part of why he took to it so well and executed well (the two are NEVER separate) but his style is not only teachable, it is one that SHOULD be teached
I still maintain that Pac's style is in no wya, shape, or form a "style you can't teach"... he just executes it well because it suits his strengths Talent and Style are not mutually exclusive
Pacquiao being able to throw 100 punches a round moving forwards, backwards, laterally, from many angles, without needing to set his feet - and with his level of speed, power, and accuracy is just as unique and unteachable as Roy's style IMO.
disagree totally... he's not doing anything unconventional... he just doing it really, really fast and powerfully because he's unusually fast and powerful... the style suits him He'd be KO'd 50 times fighting Roy's style Styles can be taught but talent also dictates which style will best suit a fighter (the missing element in this thread, IMO) I'm sure Pernell Whitaker could have been taught Joe Frazier's style and it would not have suited him because he lacks Frazier's strengths... Frazier could have been taught to box like Sweet Pea and it would not have suited him It makes no sense to have Julio Cesar Chavez fight like Willie Pastrano and vice versa... both styles can absolutely be taught to anyone... executing them is another story, as is being comfortable in those styles
:: :bears: I was interested in how different posters would perceive the question. Loadedgloves explanation just happened to match up with my own interpretation
Fair point. I guess for a teenager in the US in the 90s, Hamed with all the flash & pizzazz was like nothing we'd seen before, the second coming of Ali (that's what many were actually calling him back then), and that impression still has its imprint somewhere on my mind (in which I think).
You're only giving Slice what he wants! He threw us this thread like a hand grenade of divisiveness and now he's sitting on the sidelines with a cone and 'beetlebum' on repeat laughing his ass off.
Pac is a good example IMO. He fights like an 8 years old who just put the gloves for the first time, bouncing all around the place and throwing only two punches, yet he make it works.
that's the most insane thing I've read on here since mikE ranked Oliver McCall and Frank Bruno among the all time hardest punchers in boxing history