Great fighters... That stink

Simple really. Boxing is littered with entertaining fighters who could not reach the top level, and it also has it's fair share of great fighters who for all their talent stink the place out.

I'll get it started... Hopkins. Deathly boring spoiler who fouls his way to victory. Doesnt have knock out power or blistering hand speed to really entertain the fans.

Floyd. A modern day stinker. People paid thousands to watch him fight Baldomir and were actually leaving during the fight.

Who else has ruined your night.

Ali- Wepner............Ali-Bugner..................Ali-Spinks.......................

That Ali guy what a boring stinker............

Stop wumming Truss. You're worse than D4.

Try to resist the urge of being a Meat trombone soloist.

They were stinking fights ...............No ??

so how can I be wumming........

Ali-Terrell...............Ali-Patterson..............Ali-Lyle......................Ali - Young...................

Can we not do this on a Friday afternoon please.

Anyway to the actual question is difficult because to earn the tag great it stands to reason there will be something you do well and as such there should be something as a fan we can find to admire in a great fighter. However whilst Chris will probably never speak to me again for this have to admit I really have to be in the mood to watch Whittaker. Extraordinary defensive talent but watching a guy knowing pretty much for certain it is going the full 12 can be a bit taxing.

I'm talking about fighters that stink, not single performances. Nobody other than a dumb yank would call Ali a stinker.

Hoppo and Floyd on the other hand have ruined the nights of thousands of fans over and over.

Domestically Anthony Small. Rotten fighter and human being.

Abuse again ??............Look Ali stunk a lot as I've shown............So how is he different to Mayweather who didn't stink against hatton, gatti and others..........

Mate come on...........

Ali-Norton 3..........That's 8 stinkers before I mention Coopman..

Whitaker is a good example.

Defensive fighters will always get the raw end of the deal. Boxing is at it's best when both guys are taking shots.

Wlad is another example. Brilliant technician, but boring as hell.

Ok Truss we get it. You think Ali is a stinker. All opinions are welcome, even ones that are clearly wrong.

Wlad is a brilliant technician........

Knows his limitations more like and fights within them........If I may say without getting a volley..

Mayweather, ali, whittaker are brilliant technicians.

Molina is ALWAYS in a stinker, specifically vs Kirkland/Smith. How he is a world champ is beyond me.

Johnny Nelson was a stinker as well.

Hopkins negates the opponents strengths, he may be a stinker but a very intelligent one.

Bit harsh in Mayweather, if the guy had knock out power he would have probably knocked over 80% out with his connect ratio. The highest in the sport

Yes, Wlad is a brilliant technician.

If he was American...

Ali stunk from time to time.......Mayweather stinks from time to time.........

So it's not wrong...........You just don't like him..........

Brightside is you don't appreciate my opinion much which isn't a problem......So as I'm going a way for a week to Spain tomorrow you won't have to suffer it.....

Lumbering_Jack wrote:Yes, Wlad is a brilliant technician.

If he was American...

No offence but with our heritage.......It takes a lot to be a great American technician.....

And if Wlad had a chin he would be more exiting. But he doesn't.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

Lumbering_Jack wrote:Yes, Wlad is a brilliant technician.

If he was American...

No offence but with our heritage.......It takes a lot to be a great American technician.....

Like Joe Louis.

Friday afternoon watching a Geordie and a Mancunian (who pretends to be a Yank) bickering

Ah well...

Bit unfair on Hoppo- he wasn't a spoiler in his younger, lighter days. But to me there's no such thing as a great fighter that stinks-Whittaker was a pleasure to watch, so is FMJ.

How does having a chin make it more exciting?

Surely a Khan fight adds excitement with no chin?

Gets in a tear up, fast hands, good technically but if hit he cant take it.

Look at the maidana fight, was brilliant excitement.

Keep reading and don't contribute is my advice..

mobilemaster8 wrote:How does having a chin make it more exciting?

Surely a Khan fight adds excitement with no chin?

Gets in a tear up, fast hands, good technically but if hit he cant take it.

Look at the maidana fight, was brilliant excitement.

Khan is too exciting for his own good.

Steffan wrote:Friday afternoon watching a Geordie and a Mancunian (who pretends to be a Yank) bickering

Ah well...

I've often wondered Steffan. Pushes the US agenda quite a lot. This is a man who has argued with himself on the bbc so I wouldn't be surprised.

Feel free to believe what you will.......Like I always say If one can spot any contradiction I've made in seven years please enlighten me.....

mobilemaster8 wrote:How does having a chin make it more exciting?

Surely a Khan fight adds excitement with no chin?

Gets in a tear up, fast hands, good technically but if hit he cant take it.

Look at the maidana fight, was brilliant excitement.

It's all about styles my Mayweather loving friend.

Wlad was more aggressive before he was knocked out. He then learned to properly use the jab and fights behind it.

Khan doesn't have to ability to do this, so just goes wading in and gets caught.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Feel free to believe what you will.......Like I always say If one can spot any contradiction I've made in seven years please enlighten me.....

You've retired after being humiliated on BBC. Everyone knows this.

Lumbering_Jack wrote:

Steffan wrote:Friday afternoon watching a Geordie and a Mancunian (who pretends to be a Yank) bickering

Ah well...

I've often wondered Steffan. Pushes the US agenda quite a lot. This is a man who has argued with himself on the bbc so I wouldn't be surprised.

The whole Yank thing is just something he has kept going since the old 606. My old mans goldfish are more American than Truss

As a pretend Yank does though he likes football (soccer) and darts so we can let him off...

Lumbering_Jack wrote:

mobilemaster8 wrote:How does having a chin make it more exciting?

Surely a Khan fight adds excitement with no chin?

Gets in a tear up, fast hands, good technically but if hit he cant take it.

Look at the maidana fight, was brilliant excitement.

It's all about styles my Mayweather loving friend.

Wlad was more aggressive before he was knocked out. He then learned to properly use the jab and fights behind it.

Khan doesn't have to ability to do this, so just goes wading in and gets caught.

"My Mayweather loving friend".......That means your opinion and my "Mancunian" one doesn't count Moby..

Steffan wrote:

Lumbering_Jack wrote:

Steffan wrote:Friday afternoon watching a Geordie and a Mancunian (who pretends to be a Yank) bickering

Ah well...

I've often wondered Steffan. Pushes the US agenda quite a lot. This is a man who has argued with himself on the bbc so I wouldn't be surprised.

The whole Yank thing is just something he has kept going since the old 606. My old mans goldfish are more American than Truss

As a pretend Yank does though he likes football (soccer) and darts so we can let him off...

Have no problem with anyone thinking I'm British............

We don't want you.

Much as it hurts me, I can understand why Pernell never took off with and still doesn't excite certain observers. But (you knew I'd have a but!) I think that's more a reflection of his career at the higher weights, where he often used to win fights with his jab and movement alone. At his best weight, 135, I think he was great to watch, in general. Obviously he never had big time power but as a Lightweight he hit hard enough to command his opponent's respect and threw a much wider variety of punches, as well as a lot more of them. Absolutely peppered Haugen, Ramirez and Nelson with some dazzling combinations, which he neglected a little more as he moved through the weights, and it was only really against Zoomy that he fought more or less exclusively off the back foot.

Granted, some of his Welter reign (as well as his 154 lb title against Vasquez, in which he probably did the right thing by playing it safety-first) could be a bore. One notable exception was the second McGirt fight. There was a bit of needle between Pernell and Buddy and it was one of the rare times that you saw some real spite in Whitaker's shots. He really cut loose and the heavy punishment McGirt took belied Whitaker's reputation as a feather puncher, and basically beat McGirt's prime out of him and he was never the same again. A similar thing to Calzaghe-Lacy.

The odd thing is, for years people were begging Whitaker to just take a fight to an opponent and run in at them, and then when he finally did so he chose to do it against Hurtado, an unknown quantity who turned out to be a very good fighter only let down by his chin, and then even more amazingly Trinidad, one of the biggest and hardest-hitting Welterweight champions in history! The fact that he struggled in the first, and lost the second one (albeit past his best, with a broken jaw but still giving Tito plenty to think about) probably vindicates his use of the more cautious style as the years went on, in fairness.

Can't see how anyone could top Hoppo for #1 of this accolade.

Floyd/Pea are difficult ones because they're often enjoyable to watch, esp for the more serious fans, even if they aren't in tear ups. Watching some of the stuff last Saturday by Floyd was sensational, even if overall the fight was slightly dull as Canelo was so disappointing.

Wlad is similar, has a useful habit of knocking people out, but somehow does it in such a boring way that he could be labelled a bit of a stinker.

Ward? Bradley?

How is Eubanks not on this list?

Before Watson he had a couple of great fights but afterwards Eubanks was pretty hard to watch. If you can put the kettle on and make yourself some toast and butter and tea while the fight is going on then you are dealing with a boring fighter.

Disagree that FMJ is a stinker, watching him is watching a master at work. He just out classes his opponents, something that "true" fans enjoy to see.

Wlad. yes he's good at what he does, but there's something about heavyweights that makes you want them to be knocking each other senseless. Instead of which we get jab... jab... straight right... etc. I think the thing with heavies is because they're, well, heavy, they don't have the fleetness of foot of someone like Mayweather that you can watch a fairly dull fight and still be in awe of his work. Also the fact he always always fights in exactly the same way...

Mayweather has wonderful punch variation, which also makes him a lot easier to appreciate than Wlad.

Nothing boring about methodical dismemberment. Although I do take issue with certain stinkers being defended with the "enjoyable for serious fans" shield. While Im no "hardcore fanatic", I go to watch box 'n dines more often than most, and know more about the cruiserweight division than Dan Rafael, apparently, so Id like to think I know a bit. More importantly, Ive watched cricket my whole life and have never seen anyone refer to Shiv Chamderpaul as A joy for the "cricketing purist"...

I mean I enjoyed Canelo vs Mayweather, and Mayweather vs Cotto, so two of his last three fights, but the "for true fight fans" retort really wears thin.

ONETWOFOREVER wrote:How is Eubanks not on this list?

Before Watson he had a couple of great fights but afterwards Eubanks was pretty hard to watch. If you can put the kettle on and make yourself some toast and butter and tea while the fight is going on then you are dealing with a boring fighter.

The OP was asking about great fighters that stink, not quite good fighter that stink.

kingraf wrote:Nothing boring about methodical dismemberment.

Possibly the most generous assessment of jab-jab-jab-jab-jab-jab-jab-jab-jab-jab-right-cross I've ever read.

That phrase would be better suited to Floyd who more fits the 'cerebral assassin' moniker, to adopt wrasslin' parlance.

Wlad has developed a tremendously effective and efficient style that works brilliantly for him. However he's never faced anyone sufficiently capable to make him change (not his fault, I admit). Part of Floyd's genius is his ability to adapt mid fight or even mid round.

Rigondeaux.......enough said

ONETWOFOREVER wrote:How is Eubanks not on this list?

Before Watson he had a couple of great fights but afterwards Eubanks was pretty hard to watch. If you can put the kettle on and make yourself some toast and butter and tea while the fight is going on then you are dealing with a boring fighter.

yes but he made up for it before and afterwards. would have beaten rjj, ko 11.  

David Haye particularly at heavyweight. Runs away too much.

Strongback wrote:David Haye particularly at heavyweight.  Runs away too much.

So you admit he is great Strongy, that's progress.

Rowley wrote:

Strongback wrote:David Haye particularly at heavyweight.  Runs away too much.

So you admit he is great Strongy, that's progress.

It's been a long week, tired eyes.

Do you think he's great now?

rowley don't think 'owt great these days. apart from strictly the only thing that may make him smile would be that motorway cop show on a monday night. i reckon nothing would please him more than him seeing union getting done for road rage on the m62/m18/a1.

Hoppo and Whitaker are the only recent fighters I have watched a fair bit of that I think are "greats" and prime stinkers.

I've never taken on this whole thing of true boxing fans find the master technicians exciting either, raf.

I've trained in a boxing gym with some serious competitors (although not competed myself) and been to shows etc. I can pick the moves the guys are doing as I'm watching and I enjoy the event of top guys facing each other, but as soon as Canelo v Mayweather had settled into a rhythm I'd be lying if I said I found it exciting. I found it interesting, but I genuinely doubt I'll ever watch it again. Just wasn't exciting. More talent on display than Ward v Gatti, which I will watch again, and if that means I'm not a purist then so be it.

I like to watch great boxing skills displayed, but love a rear up as much as the next guy, Molina/Smith on the Floyd card was genuine torture.

AlexHuckerby wrote:I like to watch great boxing skills displayed, but love a rear up as much as the next guy, Molina/Smith on the Floyd card was genuine torture.

bahahahaha freudian slip

HAHAHA Genuinely meant tear up!!!!!!

I made a similar mistake on my supply chain management report on tesco in college days, Handed the work in with the surname column containing Shag instead of Shah. Teacher actually cackled when she handed it back.