Don't Make Me Angry, You Wouldn't Like Me When I'm Angry...

First topic message reminder :

Top five fighters who really do shine when they are cheesed off. Active fighters only please.

1. Andre Ward. Doesn't show it but really focuses on breaking his opponent down when feeling annoyed. Froch is the main example.

2. Mayweather. He'll put a clinic on those that rile his ass. Why do they rile him, because HBO 24/7 sometimes give them a few minutes focus. It's enough for PBF to get all worked up.

3. Vlad Drone. The all conquering heavyweight seems to be able to pound that jab a little more when he is aggrieved by his opponent. Haye is a good example, as are a few others.

4. Sergio Martinez. What he'd do to Chavez Jr if they met now would be enough to make Chavez Sr pee pee himself.

5. Adrien Broner. Not seen him super mad yet, but has really looked to hurt the last couple of opponents he's faced, and i know they were beefing due to his antics, but he still seemed more hungry and nailed some good shots on them. In the future i think we'll see him pancake some peeps, brought on by his own self-induced rage when someone calls him out as a bit of an idiot on twitter.

Thoughts?

JabMachineMK2 wrote:Its different. This "prime" lasted 2 years. I believe if you pick any "elite" boxer in this "prime" then you have an argument for anyone against anyone else.

Its just we don't seem to pick anyone except Tyson that would be this GOAT who whips everyone in history.

Not true. Some boxers have a short definable peak, where they were so exceptional it makes them an ATG. Others gain their status mainly through longevity as opposed to a handful of outrageous performances and of course most are somewhere in the middle.

I'll leave to come up with some names as a learning exercise.

In hypothetical match up ups, prime is normally assumed I think and is applied to a fighter anyway. Fighters are not robots, they peak and trough to varying degrees.

Wlad pre Sanders was not as good as he is now, Lewis pre Steward was not as good as post, Ali pre and post ban is often mentioned.

With Tyson there is such as noticeably different change between his pre and post prison sentance that the pre is usually emphasised. I think its also partially because he lost his biggest fights which were post prison, and people feel compelled to point out that he was not at his best for these, hence they emphasise the prime. The counterbalance to the "prime" Tyson is the "myth" Tyson. That any fighter with a set of stones and a half decent jab would whip Tyson.

You could easily do the the same with many fighters. I think Pre Steward Lewis gets beaten by alot of fighters whereas post Steward Lewis is a far more accomplished fighter.

For overall accomplishments I dont think the prime issue is as relevant but for head to match ups I think its very relevant what version of a fighter is competing. Especially in Tysons case where there is a pretty clear boundary.

Tyson v Lewis around 1996 would have been the fairest middle ground between the two. But prime v prime I think you looking at Tysonfrom the 80s and Lewis from around 2000 so there is a significant time stretch between both of them being at their best.

Id edge slightly towards Tyson but I think if they fought ten times Lewis might win 3/4 of the contest so its not a fight I think straightforward by any means. The first four rounds would be critical I think. Lewis was capable of starting slowly which means he could find himself out for the count or down massively on the cards by the midpoint in the fight against one of the fastest and most dynamic starters in history.

Froch coming off a one sided loss to Ward and stopping the undefeated, heavily favoured Bute and doing it in style is worthy of inclusion.