Floyds Ring IQ Is Hype

Does anybody agree with this? This article is not linked to our site so I don't take responsibility for the mistakes

http://www.boxingnews24.com/2015/03/pacquiao-vs-mayweather-floyd-ring-iq-is-hype/

Just what we need, another Floyd Mayweather thread.

The article itself is so poorly written it's hard to make out what he's actually trying to say and what I can understand is wrong, not sure why you'd link such a pile of crap to be honest.

Ring IQ is more about adaptability and that is why Mayweather and Hopkins are considered the best of the modern era in that regard, they can adapt their style to the their opponent and don't fight the same way every time.

That was a painful read, nope completely disagree with it and it seemed like an article to try and bash Floyd without openly coming out and saying it. (didn't manage to make it all the way through to be honest)

Seems a really bad attempt to be honest. Maybe i'm just too used to reading ridiculous reasons why Floyd is pants (not here mind you.)

.......

BN24's articles are always good for a giggle. Some people get really riled up by them but it's basically just an open forum where partiality is a must posing as some kind of authority on the sport, so shouldn't be taken too seriously. The historical inaccuracies and spelling / grammar errors are probably thrown in there on purpose as a wind up, to be honest.

Scott Gilfoid is my favourite. Anyone else here see / remember his article after Froch-Bute (he'd picked Bute to badly outclass and eventually stop Froch beforehand)? In it he disdainfully dismissed Froch's win and said that as far as he was concerned, Bute was still the champion because Froch should have been disqualified under the proper laws of boxing when Hearn ran in to the ring (conveniently ignoring the fact that it's the chief second / other cornermen doing so which triggers a DQ, not a promoter) and as a result the whole night was a sham and a black eye to the sport.

Think he ended on a nice wummish line like, 'I don't know how they do it over in the UK, but here in the States we like to win fair and don't celebrate cheating. Froch should be ashamed of himself' or something approximately like that! Delightful stuff.

Yeah, this site is right at the top on google results if you go looking for "boxing news". I came across it a few years ago whilst looking for credible sources, as I'm sure many have. Very biased and opinionated articles with unbelievably poor grammar and spelling (put my own to shame).

I think Gilford is either boxings biggest wum or has skin as thick as the hide of a Rhino.

Am I the only 1 that gets his news from them lovely people at 606v2

V2 Boxing is the best place for boxing news as Derby says

DuransHorse wrote:Yeah, this site is right at the top on google results if you go looking for "boxing news". I came across it a few years ago whilst looking for credible sources, as I'm sure many have.  Very biased and opinionated articles with unbelievably poor grammar and spelling (put my own to shame).

I think Gilford is either boxings biggest wum or has skin as thick as the hide of a Rhino.

I thought you were talking about v2. Swap gilford for trussman and you've captured the essence of this site uncannily.

Nice adaptability by Mayweather in the first Maidana fight.

Well he did run away with the last four rounds after struggling for eight in that one, Strongy, so he obviously corrected a couple of things somewhere along the way!

The Castillo fight (first one) was the polar opposite (dominant early, a clear second best later on) and the only fight where I can remember seeing Mayweather looking a little out of ideas and without any momentum at all by the time the final bell went. Usually, if Mayweather is getting tagged by the same punch multiple times at any stage in a fight, he'll have reversed that trend within a couple of rounds. Again the Castillo fight was a bit of a freak in that sense, as Mayweather had that super-quick left hook working well in the early goings there, but Castillo adapted and gradually fazed that punch out of the contest as he got on top.

Could argue that Mayweather's reported shoulder injury had some say in that, of course. But fair to say that if there was an adaptation battle in that fight, Mayweather lost it. Might have been the only time he's ever lost it in his career, though.

I'm not sure how much Mayweather adapts. I think he is generally cautious early on until he gets a measure of his opponent and then uses his superior ability to cruise generally to a dominant win. Not all hand picked opponents do what is expected of them though.

Same with Hopkins. He has adapted his overall game which had added to his longevity but how adaptable is he? He does the same thing every time with a lot of fouling involved.

Benny Leonard......now that was a fighter that could adapt.

Haven't read the article but I Guess it depends on your definition of adaptable. If you mean , 'starts off like Whittaker, if that doesn't work turns into Henry Armstrong' or if you mean 'has a clear style, but makes subtle variations over the fight to nullify opponents strengths and make your work more effective'

Ring IQ is more the latter for me, but if you've tried all you know and it still isn't working it might require the adaptability to do the former.

Strongback wrote:Nice adaptability by Mayweather in the first Maidana fight.

Got to admire this guy.....

It's amazing to me how a billionnaire with six degrees...A bodybuilder who lifted heavier than Arnie naturally....and a property magnate that lives in a mansion in the middle of the town center....

Can be so p**s boring....

Interesting post, milky. Can see the argument for making a distinction between the two. I guess for me adaptability and ring IQ just go hand in hand, though. As you say, showing a mastery of totally different styles from a Whitaker to an Armstrong depending on what the fight / situation requires is probably a closer definition of 'adaptability' than what I'm alluding to with Mayweather, but not that many fighters have had that kind of versatility at the highest level.

Floyd didn't completely flip his style on its head against guys like Judah, Mayweather or Maidana, all of whom have made him work hard for wins and kept it close / competitive on the cards, but he's always found a way to change the flow of the fight and take whatever his opponent was doing well and getting success with away from them one way or another. Oscar gave him a hand to some degree by running out of gas and neglecting to throw when he had the chance late on, I guess, but against Maidana and certainly against Judah in particular Floyd made visible changes to what he was doing and pulled out the late rounds under pressure.

But whatever you call it - adaptability or ring IQ - he is definitely a very smart, intelligent and savvy fighter, much as I'd prefer Manny to win on May 2.

How much of Maidana I was Mayweather adapting, as much as it was Maidana fading away? Mayweather took it away brilliantly, and if Maidana did fade, obviously Floyd had a role to play in that - ie the only style Maidana could utilise to keep up with Floyd was not sustainable, whereas Floyd still had a quarter tank going to the home straight. Can see an argument for Floyd just adapting and outwitting him, but I do think Maidana had run his race by the eighth

milkyboy wrote:Haven't read the article but I Guess it depends on your definition of adaptable. If you mean , 'starts off like Whittaker, if that doesn't work turns into Henry Armstrong' or if you mean 'has a clear style, but makes subtle variations over the fight to nullify opponents strengths and make your work more effective'

Ring IQ is more the latter for me, but if you've tried all you know and it still isn't working it might require the adaptability to do the former.

With you on that Milky. Prime example would be the Mosley fight for me, Sugar was having a bit of success with leading with the jab to the body followed by an overhand right. FMJ adjusted slightly and then countered this with ease. Naturally someone fighting him at that level is going to try things differently himself, but having a big boxing brain/ring IQ will generally mean the smarter guy is always going to be shutting those new doors as soon as they've almost opened.

The fact that Strongy is criticising a "37" year old winning the WBA title..........

Is amusing in itself..

Something in that raf for sure. I think floyd floyd manages his tank very well and comes into his own generally later in fights.

Agree coxy, there are adjustments and counter adjustments going on all the time... Well depending in the fighters!

Chris. Just a few random thoughts on the whole adapting/iq thing. Rather like being able to read the game in football... Part of it is instinctive, part experience and the lines between those are blurred. And obviously, there's no correlation with IQ out of the sporting arena... Gazza could pick a pass, but probably couldn't pick his nose without instruction.

Floyd has an abundance of natural talent/physical gifts combined with years of training and experience. I suspect (just a hypothesis) that while he'll have worked on scenarios in camp, some of it is subconscious, he may be barely aware that he's adapting, it's just second nature that he tunes in to what the opponent is doing and makes the adjustments as necessary.

I think often the great fighters also have an ability to seize the day, impose their will at critical times if necessary. It may be subtle nullifying the opposition as floyd does or more obvious changes of tack.

Leonard hearns is maybe a decent example of significant shifts. Leonard starts off as prey, catches tommy and becomes hunter, Tommy's jab is a problem in both scenarios and it still isn't working for ray. Does Leonard do much different after the rollicking from Dundee? He seems to ups the ante must maybe tommy was tiring from the hunt regardless. Of course  not long before that he got dragged into duran's fight in Montreal and seemed unable to adjust. Lack of iq from Leonard or just a better one/stronger will from duran?

milkyboy wrote:Something in that raf for sure. I think floyd floyd manages his tank very well and comes into his own generally later in fights.

Agree coxy, there are adjustments and counter adjustments going on all the time... Well depending in the fighters!

Chris. Just a few random thoughts on the whole adapting/iq thing. Rather like being able to read the game in football... Part of it is instinctive, part experience and the lines between those are blurred. And obviously, there's no correlation with IQ out of the sporting arena... Gazza could pick a pass, but probably couldn't pick his nose without instruction.

Floyd has an abundance of natural talent/physical gifts combined with years of training and experience. I suspect (just a hypothesis) that while he'll have worked on scenarios in camp, some of it is subconscious, he may be barely aware that he's adapting, it's just second nature that he tunes in to what the opponent is doing and makes the adjustments as necessary.

I think often the great fighters also have an ability to seize the day, impose their will at critical times if necessary. It may be subtle nullifying the opposition as floyd does or more obvious changes of tack.

Leonard hearns is maybe a decent example of significant shifts. Leonard starts off as prey, catches tommy and becomes hunter, Tommy's jab is a problem in both scenarios and it still isn't working for ray. Does Leonard do much different after the rollicking from Dundee? He seems to ups the ante must maybe tommy was tiring from the hunt regardless. Of course  not long before that he got dragged into duran's fight in Montreal and seemed unable to adjust. Lack of iq from Leonard or just a better one/stronger will from duran?

How much is adapting and how much is it a guy not being able to sustain his attack ???

You can't smother a guy for twelve rounds as Williams- Toney......Hatton - Mayweather showed.........

When you start to ease up and it becomes a boxing match the natural talent will always win out...........Think that was more Maidana v Floyd 1........

Very few great fighters have Plan B's.....................Robbo never figured Turpin out in 25 rounds..............Ali never figured Norton out...

Maidana's problem was that he was never going to be able to sustain his assaults and when you give a great fighter time...He's going to take full advantage..

I think it may be written by a Pinoy: 'But is getting hit less, make you a smarter fighter?' 'is that signify he is smarter'. No, but learning to write properly might make you sound smarter.

WUM articles work, kids. 441 comments.

'Pernel Wittaker'? Make an effort.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

milkyboy wrote:Something in that raf for sure. I think floyd floyd manages his tank very well and comes into his own generally later in fights.

Agree coxy, there are adjustments and counter adjustments going on all the time... Well depending in the fighters!

Chris. Just a few random thoughts on the whole adapting/iq thing. Rather like being able to read the game in football... Part of it is instinctive, part experience and the lines between those are blurred. And obviously, there's no correlation with IQ out of the sporting arena... Gazza could pick a pass, but probably couldn't pick his nose without instruction.

Floyd has an abundance of natural talent/physical gifts combined with years of training and experience. I suspect (just a hypothesis) that while he'll have worked on scenarios in camp, some of it is subconscious, he may be barely aware that he's adapting, it's just second nature that he tunes in to what the opponent is doing and makes the adjustments as necessary.

I think often the great fighters also have an ability to seize the day, impose their will at critical times if necessary. It may be subtle nullifying the opposition as floyd does or more obvious changes of tack.

Leonard hearns is maybe a decent example of significant shifts. Leonard starts off as prey, catches tommy and becomes hunter, Tommy's jab is a problem in both scenarios and it still isn't working for ray. Does Leonard do much different after the rollicking from Dundee? He seems to ups the ante must maybe tommy was tiring from the hunt regardless. Of course  not long before that he got dragged into duran's fight in Montreal and seemed unable to adjust. Lack of iq from Leonard or just a better one/stronger will from duran?

How much is adapting and how much is it a guy not being able to sustain his attack ???

You can't smother a guy for twelve rounds as Williams- Toney......Hatton - Mayweather showed.........

When you start to ease up and it becomes a boxing match the natural talent will always win out...........Think that was more Maidana v Floyd 1........

Very few great fighters have Plan B's.....................Robbo never figured Turpin out in 25 rounds..............Ali never figured Norton out...

Maidana's problem was that he was never going to be able to sustain his assaults and when you give a great fighter time...He's going to take full advantage..

Fair points, i think we're all broadly agreeing on maidana 1. It may get all get exaggerated in Floyd's case. His opponents are all hoping they have the blueprint and trying to impose their strategy on him early... often expending a lot of energy, even in some cases just nervous energy. People might remember a 400 metre runner called butch reynolds. He made what looked like amazing sprint finishes to catch his opponents in the straight. In reality he ran even splits and they all just came back to him as they faded.

Great point ie expending energy.........

Great players are intimidating in any sport.........There is always a habit I imagine of either "trying" to hard to impress them !!!...Or going into your shell and freezing...

Great players/fighters impose themselves on the opposition before a game starts sometimes subconsciously.....

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:The fact that Strongy is criticising a "37" year old winning the WBA title..........

Is amusing in itself..

The fact that you're so butt hurt as a 48 year old man is whats amazing.

Mr Hearn wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:The fact that Strongy is criticising a "37" year old winning the WBA title..........

Is amusing in itself..

The fact that you're so butt hurt as a 48 year old man is whats amazing.

Yep..........