Qualities --- Most Desirable...

Athletic and fast are basically synonyms. Who the hell is fast without being 'athletic'? How would that work? There's a tenuous distinction there if any.

But I stand by my pick. A guy with just one attribute and nothing else is gonna be a bottom run bum, no matter what. So you may as well pick the attribute best suited to making a living as a bottom run bum. Speed and power make you too potentially dangerous for a match maker to use. Chin and nothing else make you a useful journeyman who can cut out a niche as a round giving opponent, especially if you learn a little craft with it.

 

not really.

Fasted-handed..without being Athletic.

Example: Tony Tubbs.

 

Tubbs WAS athletic. He was just also a fat bastard waste of life. That discrepancy can only happen at heavyweight.

 

I agree with Sly, obviously. I have to think if you're poor in every area, speed is a distant second to power. Also, I kind of thought of speed as a non-category --- rather, broken up into handspeed, footspeed, & reflexes, where I had just the one to choose from.

With that said, I'd considered my stance from the viewpoint the fighter attempting to win. Hut-Hut puts an interesting new spin on it.

 

:atu:

Very funny indeed...

I guess I'm seeing "athleticism" as movement more than anything. Overall movement: legs, upperbody and arms (hands). Handspeed, for me is just the speed of punching. Athleticism is the overall speed, and agility of the body.

So in my definition...there is no doubt a distinction and it's not a "tenuous" distinction

 

So the guy with power only has poor: speed, movement, athleticism, chin, technique, stamina and intelligence.

He's not winning anything. Neither is the guy with speed only. In this instance I'd have to say either athleticism or technique. One is going to help you evade shots (which you'll need) and the other would give you the understanding of the various techniques to employ against fighters to try and cancel out your weaknesses.

 

No matter which attribute you choose, it's likely he's, "not winning anything." There's no real way around that. It becomes a question of which single quality, more advanced than his opponents, gives him the greatest chance for upsets?

I voted raw, unadulterated power.

 

And you voted correctly. It's the only attribute that, in isolation, leaves you with the possibility of the upset.

 

I see. Yeah fair enough, I suppose somebody can have fast hands and not have fast feet.....young James Toney? Two do usually go together though. Tubbs was obviously an exception just coz the belly weighed down his overall movement much more than his arms.

 

fact is: none of us can possibly imagine a "quality" in isolation. which is why it makes for good discussion. ability is greater than the sum of it's parts.

 

Joe Louis didn't have a big belly.....his hands were blazing and his feet were slow as molasses.