Boxing styles - which is the proven best

Fighters employ many different styles in the boxing ring.

Seek and destroy - eg Chavez Snr, GGG,
Pot shotter - eg Roy Jones Jnr, Floyd Mayweather
Dancing destroyer - M.Ali , Tunny
Textbook - Arguello, Monzon
Street - James Toney, N.Benn
Switch hitter - Pacman, Haglar

Have I left any out?

Which is in your opinion the best over the years.

Floyd Mayweather - Pot Shotter..... As much as I dislike the guy, to refer to him as a pot shotter does nothing to prevent me from thinking you're a pratt!

DAVE667 wrote:Floyd Mayweather - Pot Shotter..... As much as I dislike the guy, to refer to him as a pot shotter does nothing to prevent me from thinking you're a pratt!

Then you think 3 time world heavyweight champion Evander Holyfield is a pratt also seeing as he has described Mayweather as such leading up to the Canelo fight, and I will rather take his word then some clinically obese keyboard warrier ninja barbarian.

Would you count high output/work-rate as a separate style? Thinking Calzaghe types here.

Toney and Benn don't spring to mind as sharing a style. I'm open to enlightenment on what elements they share though...

Hahaha Tony and Benn, combine them to make a socialist warrior!

theanimal316 wrote:Would you count high output/work-rate as a separate style?  Thinking Calzaghe types here.

Yes good shout

Calzaghe did outwork most of his opponants correct.

ONETWOFOREVER wrote:

DAVE667 wrote:Floyd Mayweather - Pot Shotter..... As much as I dislike the guy, to refer to him as a pot shotter does nothing to prevent me from thinking you're a pratt!

Then you think 3 time world heavyweight champion Evander Holyfield is a pratt also seeing as he has described Mayweather as such leading up to the Canelo fight, and I will rather take his word then some clinically obese keyboard warrier ninja barbarian.

Yes I do, and if you want to take the word of a fighter who is probably in the early stages of pugilistic dementia then so be it.

Given Mayweather has every punch in the book at his disposal and uses them all to very good effect, I struggle to see how he can be referred to as a pot shotter. Excellent shot selection and combination punching doesn't make him a pot shotter,

Also, I'm comfortably within the weight limit for my height and build but again, you allow yourself to think I'm fat if it helps you sleep at night, little man

No such thing as best style. The very best all time can do about anything. They can move, they can counter, they can box on the back foot or bang on the front foot.

Gun to head I will pick a fighter that can stay in range and not be hit. Jones at his peak or Mayweather.

Then again styles make fights. Tyson destroyed Spinks in a round. Ali would have toyed with him for a number of rounds. Manny destroys Hatton in 2 rounds but imo Mayweather was just as masterful winning nearly every round and knocking him out late.

The beauty of boxing is, no one style is the best. It is the fighter that can adapt to any style that is the one that is greatest imo.

DAVE667 wrote:

ONETWOFOREVER wrote:

DAVE667 wrote:Floyd Mayweather - Pot Shotter..... As much as I dislike the guy, to refer to him as a pot shotter does nothing to prevent me from thinking you're a pratt!

Then you think 3 time world heavyweight champion Evander Holyfield is a pratt also seeing as he has described Mayweather as such leading up to the Canelo fight, and I will rather take his word then some clinically obese keyboard warrier ninja barbarian.

Yes I do, and if you want to take the word of a fighter who is probably in the early stages of pugilistic dementia then so be it.

Given Mayweather has every punch in the book at his disposal and uses them all to very good effect, I struggle to see how he can be referred to as a pot shotter. Excellent shot selection and combination punching doesn't make him a pot shotter,

Also, I'm comfortably within the weight limit for my height and build but again, you allow yourself to think I'm fat if it helps you sleep at night, little man

I know your not Mayweathers biggest fan but fair play to you for giving credit were it's due. In a couple of Floyds fights he maybe did just pot shot more rounds than not but he is definitely more than just a pot shotter.

I agree no one style trumps any other. The key is finding a style that suits your attributes. GGG's 'seek an destroy' is an excellent current example, cuts off the ring beautifully and gets his opponents in range where he can let his hands go. He's got the smarts to make it his fight.

Dipper Brown wrote:I agree no one style trumps any other. The key is finding a style that suits your attributes. GGG's 'seek an destroy' is an excellent current example, cuts off the ring beautifully and gets his opponents in range where he can let his hands go. He's got the smarts to make it his fight.

Agreed but if he were to somehow fight such a man that could stay in range and make him miss then punish him, then he would be in trouble. Fortunately for him there are no middleweights that can do do that. Jones or a peak Toney would of been GGG's worst nightmare. They would of imo won a fight very easily with Golovkin. As much as I love watching GGG, he would struggle badly with a master defensive boxer like a Toney or a speed machine like Jones.

As Adam says, it's horses for courses and there isn't one style that's guaranteed to work against every single opponent. But if you take the generally considered all-time number one, Robinson, and then look at who I'd consider the most versatile all-time great, the other Sugar Ray (Leonard), then you have two boxer-punchers with more attacking inclinations than defensive ones (but still a decent concept of defence). I think in the two Sugar Rays you've got a couple of fighters well-equipped to deal with most things any opponent could throw at them and that kind of rounded boxer-puncher style gave them the edge over a lot of their contemporaries.

Floyd was closer to that kind of fighter at Super-Feather, but has become more of a pure boxer and cagey operator at the higher weights, the odd exception aside (Gatti, Mosley).

Some guys such as Kalambay, Eddie Mustafa Muhammad, Whitaker, Winky Wright etc were all exceptionally skilled and did paint that canvas with some real artistry, but a bit more of a cutting edge might have prevented them from losing a couple of contentious decisions here and there, for instance. Generally if I was designing a boxer and trying to give them the best possible chance of success against all other kinds of styles, I'd use the Sugar Rays as my rough guide and place a bit of a higher focus on attack rather than defence, but not to a Golovkin or McClellan extent.

88Chris05 wrote:As Adam says, it's horses for courses and there isn't one style that's guaranteed to work against every single opponent. But if you take the generally considered all-time number one, Robinson, and then look at who I'd consider the most versatile all-time great, the other Sugar Ray (Leonard), then you have two boxer-punchers with more attacking inclinations than defensive ones (but still a decent concept of defence). I think in the two Sugar Rays you've got a couple of fighters well-equipped to deal with most things any opponent could throw at them and that kind of rounded boxer-puncher style gave them the edge over a lot of their contemporaries.

Floyd was closer to that kind of fighter at Super-Feather, but has become more of a pure boxer and cagey operator at the higher weights, the odd exception aside (Gatti, Mosley).

Some guys such as Kalambay, Eddie Mustafa Muhammad, Whitaker, Winky Wright etc were all exceptionally skilled and did paint that canvas with some real artistry, but a bit more of a cutting edge might have prevented them from losing a couple of contentious decisions here and there, for instance. Generally if I was designing a boxer and trying to give them the best possible chance of success against all other kinds of styles, I'd use the Sugar Rays as my rough guide and place a bit of a higher focus on attack rather than defence, but not to a Golovkin or McClellan extent.

Agreed good post. Sugar Ray leonard was an attacking fighter but he was also a crafty fighter and very fast. A man with all them attributes will always be very hard to overcome.

88Chris05 wrote:As Adam says, it's horses for courses and there isn't one style that's guaranteed to work against every single opponent. But if you take the generally considered all-time number one, Robinson, and then look at who I'd consider the most versatile all-time great, the other Sugar Ray (Leonard), then you have two boxer-punchers with more attacking inclinations than defensive ones (but still a decent concept of defence). I think in the two Sugar Rays you've got a couple of fighters well-equipped to deal with most things any opponent could throw at them and that kind of rounded boxer-puncher style gave them the edge over a lot of their contemporaries.

Floyd was closer to that kind of fighter at Super-Feather, but has become more of a pure boxer and cagey operator at the higher weights, the odd exception aside (Gatti, Mosley).

Some guys such as Kalambay, Eddie Mustafa Muhammad, Whitaker, Winky Wright etc were all exceptionally skilled and did paint that canvas with some real artistry, but a bit more of a cutting edge might have prevented them from losing a couple of contentious decisions here and there, for instance. Generally if I was designing a boxer and trying to give them the best possible chance of success against all other kinds of styles, I'd use the Sugar Rays as my rough guide and place a bit of a higher focus on attack rather than defence, but not to a Golovkin or McClellan extent.

I forgot about boxer puncher good shout.

Robinson got hit quite a lot but Leonard was special I agree

The style that wins the fight is the one I've always regarded as the best one

GGG gave a heads up to the Mexicans the other day comparing his style to the style that is taught in many a Mexican gym. Of course Chavez Jnr gets the credit for making that style world famous. Its interesting that the seek and destroy style has become so important for Mexican fighters that many will avoid the amature ranks because this style is not so effective.

what's best... peas, vans, walrus or paper?

(I prefer walrus)

I sometimes dislike the term 'outbox'. Kind of implies that there's one way to box and the best boxer is the guy who adheres to that blueprint. Pious and arrogant viewpoint.

There's more than one way to skin a cat and you do whatever's best for you. If that means windmilling like a nutter while your opponent tries to time you off that back foot then so be it.

In footballing terms, its the same as Barcelona getting their knickers in a twist when people play a different style to them. What should you do, turn up, play a watered down style of their football and be happy to lose? If they can't break down a deep lying defence it's their problem.

Hard to claim you outboxed someone when you're lying face down on the canvas! Punching is boxing!

Is Pacman a switch hitter?

kingraf wrote:Is Pacman a switch hitter?

Have to ask Jinki

kingraf wrote:Is Pacman a switch hitter?

I would say yes.

DAVE667 wrote:

ONETWOFOREVER wrote:

DAVE667 wrote:Floyd Mayweather - Pot Shotter..... As much as I dislike the guy, to refer to him as a pot shotter does nothing to prevent me from thinking you're a pratt!

Then you think 3 time world heavyweight champion Evander Holyfield is a pratt also seeing as he has described Mayweather as such leading up to the Canelo fight, and I will rather take his word then some clinically obese keyboard warrier ninja barbarian.

Yes I do, and if you want to take the word of a fighter who is probably in the early stages of pugilistic dementia then so be it.

Given Mayweather has every punch in the book at his disposal and uses them all to very good effect, I struggle to see how he can be referred to as a pot shotter. Excellent shot selection and combination punching doesn't make him a pot shotter,

Also, I'm comfortably within the weight limit for my height and build but again, you allow yourself to think I'm fat if it helps you sleep at night, little man

:laugh:Insecure?

and what makes you think I have trouble sleeping? I sleep like a baby

ONETWOFOREVER wrote:

DAVE667 wrote:

ONETWOFOREVER wrote:

DAVE667 wrote:Floyd Mayweather - Pot Shotter..... As much as I dislike the guy, to refer to him as a pot shotter does nothing to prevent me from thinking you're a pratt!

Then you think 3 time world heavyweight champion Evander Holyfield is a pratt also seeing as he has described Mayweather as such leading up to the Canelo fight, and I will rather take his word then some clinically obese keyboard warrier ninja barbarian.

Yes I do, and if you want to take the word of a fighter who is probably in the early stages of pugilistic dementia then so be it.

Given Mayweather has every punch in the book at his disposal and uses them all to very good effect, I struggle to see how he can be referred to as a pot shotter. Excellent shot selection and combination punching doesn't make him a pot shotter,

Also, I'm comfortably within the weight limit for my height and build but again, you allow yourself to think I'm fat if it helps you sleep at night, little man

:laugh:Insecure?

and what makes you think I have trouble sleeping? I sleep like a baby

You mean you wake up screaming having sh!t yourself and wanting your mama's t!tty? Doesn't surprise me!

But anyway you carry on with your cataloguing of boxing styles...what's next, Tyson Fury - SLICKSTER?

DAVE667 wrote:

ONETWOFOREVER wrote:

DAVE667 wrote:

ONETWOFOREVER wrote:

DAVE667 wrote:Floyd Mayweather - Pot Shotter..... As much as I dislike the guy, to refer to him as a pot shotter does nothing to prevent me from thinking you're a pratt!

Then you think 3 time world heavyweight champion Evander Holyfield is a pratt also seeing as he has described Mayweather as such leading up to the Canelo fight, and I will rather take his word then some clinically obese keyboard warrier ninja barbarian.

Yes I do, and if you want to take the word of a fighter who is probably in the early stages of pugilistic dementia then so be it.

Given Mayweather has every punch in the book at his disposal and uses them all to very good effect, I struggle to see how he can be referred to as a pot shotter. Excellent shot selection and combination punching doesn't make him a pot shotter,

Also, I'm comfortably within the weight limit for my height and build but again, you allow yourself to think I'm fat if it helps you sleep at night, little man

:laugh:Insecure?

and what makes you think I have trouble sleeping? I sleep like a baby

You mean you wake up screaming having sh!t yourself and wanting your mama's t!tty? Doesn't surprise me!




But anyway you carry on with your cataloguing of boxing styles...what's next, Tyson Fury - SLICKSTER?

DAVE DAVE DAVE

Lets call a truce aye?

Its not like our little forum war is going to end with a KO, this fight will just rumble on and on and on.

I am willing to bury the hatchet and extend my hand in peace.

Aggressive front foot counter-puncher (one not afraid to lead off), who also has the ability to open up to finish a fight or when required.

In other words..

Boxer-Puncher/Fighter

3fingers wrote:Aggressive front foot counter-puncher (one not afraid to lead off), who also has the ability to open up to finish a fight or when required.

In other words..

Boxer-Puncher/Fighter

Sugar Ray Robinson?

3fingers wrote:Aggressive front foot counter-puncher (one not afraid to lead off), who also has the ability to open up to finish a fight or when required.

In other words..

Boxer-Puncher/Fighter

That pretty much sums up Andre Ward.

Front foot counter punching does not get enough credit.

Good shout.

Nothing bores me more than reading squabbles fueled by pride....well done for offering the olive branch to 667.

You missed Drunken Boxing

3fingers wrote:Nothing bores me more than reading squabbles fueled by pride....well done for offering the olive branch to 667.

He still has not responded.

Ah well I tried.

3fingers wrote:Nothing bores me more than reading squabbles fueled by pride....well done for offering the olive branch to 667.

Surely you mean admitting when he's been whupped? ONETWONO-MAS throws in the towel.

if someone offers peace you show a little humility and accept

Walrus.

3fingers wrote: if someone offers peace you show a little humility and accept

Acceptance...fine...humility? NEVER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Difference between men and women is that a woman is happy to win whereas a man wants the other guy to know he's lost!

Qoxiivi wrote:Walrus.

Walnuts

DAVE667 wrote:

3fingers wrote: if someone offers peace you show a little humility and accept

Difference between men and women is that a woman is happy to win whereas a man wants the other guy to know he's lost!

Nonsense. You simply described the difference between a gentleman and an idiot.

3fingers wrote:

DAVE667 wrote:

3fingers wrote: if someone offers peace you show a little humility and accept

Difference between men and women is that a woman is happy to win whereas a man wants the other guy to know he's lost!

Nonsense. You simply described the difference between a gentleman and an idiot.

Whatever makes you happy fella (although clearly it's being a sanctimonious pr!ck)

Haven't you got the Syrian crisis to bless with your considered opinions?

I don't think any style by its self has proven th e most effective. it seems to be fighters that incorporate as many of the elements as possible. Ali, quick, powerful, chin, stamina, boxing skill, good feet. while he had some of those qualities a little less than the other he certainly had them all.

like wise, you can not say Floyd has no chin or is feather fisted..

Manny is no switch hitter. He carries power in both hands but I can't remember him ever boxing from an orthodox stance. Also can anyone define what style "street" is? You will struggle to find two fighters more different than Benn and Toney. I don't think there is such a thing as a perfect style, each has it's strengths and weaknesses, it's up to the boxer to adapt to their own physical gifts and limitations and find what works for them against what opponent.

Bramble used to switch hit quite effectively...............Hagler was good at it too.....

Simon Brown was another fighter that could fight off both feet.

It's something that comes easily to you or it doesn't...Certainly a hard thing to perfect...

Junior witter used to switch hit. He worked on the philosophy that if it confused him (which it clearly did) it must also confuse the opponent.

Hagler of course used it to great effect in dishing out his silent beating to Leonard.

Re the OP. Given that no-one style will always beat another, common sense suggests that true greats can/or should be able to adapt, or at the very least have a plan b. However, if you look at most peoples p4p goat lists they are littered with guys who didn't actually adapt much and just imposed their style and will on their opponent regardless of that opponents style. So I'd say its the man that defines this question not the style.

The best style is actually the style no-one wants to face so basically to cut through the BS, it's Peter Jackson as Sullivan refused to face him and Corbett refused him the rematch for the HW title he so richly deserved

The baseball style is probably the best............When a guy throws a jab you crack his head with a wooden bat.....

Guaranteed to keep the "0" ..

... You might well lose your '0' in prison truss.

Doubt it..............Too good at working "Inside"....

TRUSSMAN claiming a mastery of the "Brown arts" I see

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Bramble used to switch hit quite effectively...............Hagler was good at it too.....

Simon Brown was another fighter that could fight off both feet.

It's something that comes easily to you or it doesn't...Certainly a hard thing to perfect...

Kid Gavilan wasn't bad at it either, Truss. Sometimes he'd switch it up in the middle of fights and fight an entire round out of the blue as a southpaw (take a look at the Chuck Davey fight as an example).

There are some guys who tried it and you had no idea why. De la Hoya was a natural left hander who boxed in the orthodox stance from his teens onwards, but obviously thought that it'd be something he'd be able to call on (switching stances) as a result of this - but he was never too hot at it. Tried it at times against Whitaker (probably not the smartest move by Oscar, trying to practice his southpaw stance against the best southpaw in the world!) and ended up hitting nowt but thin air and even getting decked while fighting out of that stance. Even Tyson (like De la Hoya, also a naturally left-handed guy) used to switch his stance here and there for the odd punch, though never for more than a few seconds.

Of course, nobody's ever done it quite like Tyson Fury did with his left-handed masterpiece against Rogan.

88Chris05 wrote:
Of course, nobody's ever done it quite like Tyson Fury did with his left-handed masterpiece against Rogan.

:DI was at this masterclass he gave in switch hitting Chris, thanks for reminding me.  Does anyone know what fight it was where he punched himself?  I have heard about this and want to see it.

Lee Swaby.