How hard can Floyd punch?

the point i'm making is that you throw out your track record at picking fights as evidence that you know the game. well that may be true. but it doesn't mean that picking fights wrong means someone doesn't know the game. in some cases, it just means that they pick with their heart.

you cannot generalize the inability to pick fights to mean a lack of knowledge. that's all i'm saying.

 

Watched the first 3 rounds: he would have beaten Pacquiao!:: Dunno what the sweet fuck happened in the rest of the fight that it ended up a SD, the first 3 rounds were like watching a killer whale playing with a seal pup, absolute sparring session.

Thanks for posting though, watching Sanchez is joyous, one of the guys I could just watch do his thing all day.:cheer: If you don't come away thinking a guy with kinda technical ability is amazing I dunno what to say.:dunno:

 

only one problem. fights are not 3 rounds - they're 12 !!! you act surprised that you aren't able to predict the outcome of a 12 round fight by watching just 3 rounds.

 

Dude, I've watched about 100 fucking rounds of the guys career which is what I accumulatively make my pick on. I have work, study & a work out to do, Im not gonna spend an hour watching a 15 round fight just because Mr. Mex posts it for me. And Im not gonna abstain from making a pick between two guys I've seen all the major fights of for that reason.

 

He was technically good, but not particularly talented. Wasn't that fast, wasn't that powerful. It's been a while since I watched a Sanchez fight, but I think after refreshing my memory there's absolutely no way he beats Pacquiao, no way.

Sanchez was slow, slower than Marquez, and for a good "boxer" with technical ability, he sure did miss a lot of shots, he wasn't exactly a sharp shooter. In fact I'd say Morales, Marquez and of course Pacquiao are all more accurate.

I think a fight between him and Marquez at 126 would have been a toss up, it would have been a close, technical fight.

In that very fight above, against an average fighter, he was constantly missing with these wide hooks, and wide open for Pacman's left hand right down the middle. Pacquiao would have beaten his arse.

Pep, Saddler and Arguello would have been much tougher matchups for Pacquiao, stylistically. I think Pacquiao would have given Sanchez a beating.

 

Fair enough. I'll stand by Sanchez at featherweight. If Marquez and Morales can best Pac at or around that weight then I think a guy I consider superior to either with a comparable style will too. You're right that Sanchez wasn't a sharp shooter, but that's like saying 'Pac isn't an infighter' or 'Ali isn't a body puncher', you have to put a fighters deficiencies in the context of their style. Sanchez invariably landed ALLOT more than he took since his footwork, defence, punch picking, 'ring generalship' and general boxing IQ was so sharp.

 

Sanchez wasn't particularly talented? Are you serious?

 

His style is most comparable to Marquez, and of course, Marquez is the fighter that's given Manny the most trouble apart from Erik in the first fight.

But I guess the difference is, I don't think Sanchez is better than Marquez. Technically they are similar, Sanchez having perhaps slightly better defense, but Marquez is a bit quicker and significantly more accurate. And Marquez is one of those fighters that just seemed to have the perfect style to give an overall better fighter fits, like Norton or Young to Ali, like Vernon to Mosley, like Jr Jones to Barrera, like Tarver to Jones etc etc, or even De Jesus to Duran. And as for Morales, he beat Pacquiao with a nice jab and hard, straight, accurate shots - Sanchez doesn't resemble Morales stylistically.

The Pacquiao of today is actually quite a bit better than the Pacquiao at featherweight. He is possibly the only fighter I've ever seen that continues to improve even aged 30. But even the featherweight Pacquiao, for my money, is a much better fighter than Sanchez. Ring generalship or not, I can't see someone as slow and inaccurate as Sanchez beating Pacquiao.

 

Yep, he was skilled, not overly talented - just like Marquez.

 

I think he just means that he wasn't particularly physically gifted. Which is a fair observation. But one look at the career of Zab Judah should demonstrate the perils of confusing talent with ostensible physical gifts.:fightme:

 

Exactly. And yes, Judah is a prime example of why physical talent isn't the be all and end all.

Nothing wrong with being skilled instead of talented. Marquez is a prime example of someone who's made a great career out of skill and intelligence rather than physical talent. Even Hopkins, while pretty talented in his prime, relies more on skill and craft than physical talent (though he is fairly quick, even at this age, he was much quicker than Pavlik :: ).

 

Isn't the ability to soak up a skill set to such a pronounced level & apply it a talent though? I mean Sanchez' footwork, angles, punch picking etc show a degree of spacial awareness that probably can't be imparted. And his chin, toughness and calmness under fire isn't a skill set that can be imparted either. That = talent just as much as handspeed in my book.

 

As odd as it sounds, a good chin is talent yes ::

But skill can be taught. Some are better at learning skills and applying them than others, Sanchez would be one of those, and I guess in a sense one could interpet that as talent, but when I say talent I'm more talking about physical talent that can't be taught - ie someone as quick and powerful as Pacquiao, someone with the reactions and sharpness of Duran etc, someone with the raw power of Tyson.

 

Sanchez was one of the most talented fighters of all-time. To compare him to a hard worker like Marquez is ridiculous. Sanchez did everything he did half baked out of his skull.

 

I know what you mean, thats usually how I would use it too....and I actually do think handspeed is usually the most important talent in boxing, when I doubt I always go with the faster guy.

Just saying that raw physical gifts like speed and power don't = talent, in my book. There's so much more to it and allot of what people call 'heart' or 'skill' is just as much 'talent' as anything else really. If it can't be imparted it's a raw talent, full stop IMO. To an extent it's just just semantics but I think it's important to remember too since it's so easy to get overexcited when we see a guy with blazing handspeed or KO power bowling over C class guys, when it's the other less visually impressive elements of talent that usually prove more important at the elite, elite level. Or to undersell the abilities of great fighters who don't have the highlight reel physical gifts as guys who just soldiered through on pluck and will power. A guy like Zab Judah could never be as good as guys like Sanchez or Monzon no matter how hard he tried or who trained him, since he doesn't have the ability to concentrate, the spacial awareness, the innate ability to soak up the skill set, the intelligence, the chin, etc etc. Doesn't have the talent.

 

Having natural fighting instinct isn't the same as physical talent, that guys like Pacman, Duran and Tyson have in abundance.

Sanchez might have had natural fighting aptitude, but he's not even close to being one of the most talented fighters of all time.

 

Those are the exact names that Sanchez should be sitting with. He IS those guys.

Sure he's not. :notallthere:

Take a poll. Watch youself lose miserably and then come up with a reason why that doesn't matter.

 

It's a fair point. I guess at face value I'm used to classifying talent just as physical talent, talent you can see in motion - athleticism, speed, power etc.

But chin is a natural born talent, so is focus, and I guess so is natural boxing acumen. Skill can be taught, but obviously some fighters have more natural boxing acumen than others.

To re state my point then, Sanchez certainly wasn't physically talented, but was obviously a natural fighter, which is a talent.

 

Are you insane?

Sanchez wasn't fast, wasn't an exceptional puncher, wasn't particularly athletic.

So how exactly is he as talented as Duran, Tyson and Pacman?

 

Sums it up perfectly.

 

Oh and you can stop replying to my posts now. Im done.

 

I'll reply to your posts as much as I want, you prick.

So the piece above salivates over how natural a fighter Sanchez was, which was what I stated above, natural boxing acumen/fighting instinct.

So again, how was he as physically talented as Pacman, Duran or Tyson?

 

But again..... who's more 'talented' Monzon or Judah?

And I don't bring it up to be obtuse or a prick.....it illustrates an important point, as I rattled on about in the last post.

 

:: :: ::

 

::

 

In terms of physical talent as I made a distinction of, Judah without a doubt.

And I say that with King Carlos being one of my favourite fighters of all time.

Of course that doesn't mean Carlos wasn't a million times better as a fighter, because of focus, composure, chin, skill, and clinical precision to which he would operate.

But in terms of raw physical talent, Judah was incredibly fast, powerful, athletic, accurate, but with no brains, no composure, and no chin.

If you classify focus, composure, ring IQ, general boxing acumen etc as talent, then of course Monzon would be more talented.

The reason I think of physical talent when I think "talent" is because for me talent is something that can't be taught. And even though some fighters are born with those things far more than others, they are still things that can be taught/improved to some degree. But you can't teach someone to be more athletic can you?

 

Talent in boxing is when fighting comes naturally. If it were about hand-speed and other athletic abilities, we'd have to marvel at the performances of Derrick Gainer.

If Sanchez wasn't a talented fighter, then there's no such thing. Sanchez was an absolute natural.

 

so what if a basketball player is tall, strong, can jump high, and run fast, but he averages 4 points a game? do you consider him physically talented? as a basketball player?

 

I'd say the Klitschkos & David Haye have improved their athleticism through proper training more than you could ever improve the kind of things that Monzon has that Judah lacks. :dunno:

 

No way. The Klitschkos have not become more athletic in the slightest, they have become more polished and crafty. David Haye has become a bit crisper/sharper more polished too, but more athletic? I don't see how.

Look at Pacquiao, incredibly talented naturally, and in the last few years has become more composed, more patient, better defensively, has improved ring IQ, thinks about what he is doing more, and has become FAR more clinical and precise, and less wild. That's your example right there of being able to learn the attributes that made Carlos the fighter he was.

Could you teach Gay Marquez to fight more like Roy Jones?