A Closer Look at the Brilliance of the Sweet Science

By Andrew “Drew The Picture” Hames

The widespread belief in the sport of boxing which sides with the arguments of the sport’s legendary all-time greats of the early 1900’s and prior years over their contemporaries in alternate eras is largely rooted in the emphasis of the belief that basic fundamental rudiments will always outweigh mere athleticism. Never more visible is this belief than in hypothetical fantasy match-ups fight fans and aficionados alike routinely post and debate over between the generally more technically sound fighters of boxing’s more glorified eras and the generally more athletically gifted fighters of the modern generation. While both sides of the debate present compelling cases, I’m of the personal opinion that both forces represent the proverbial yin and yang of competition, with neither entirely outweighing the other….

Any avid sports fan would likely be aware that athleticism, on a broad scale, has evolved dramatically from sports yesteryear, just as the combination of evolution and human growth hormones have resulted in high school basketball players of the 7-foot variety and teenagers in general who could easily pass for adults before opening their mouths. Because of such factors, it stands to reason, for example, that a dominant NBA team that played during an era where players still dribbled the ball with one hand, had never heard of a “crossover dribble”, a “three-pointer”, a “fast break”, “alley-oop”, a “7-footer”, etc, would be perceived to be up against significant disadvantages even facing a bottom-tier team of the modern game, simply because the modern team would be accustomed to competing against all of the above. A great football team of the leather helmet era, that hadn’t yet dealt with a 4.2 runner, a 6’5 wide receiver, exotic blitzes, mobile quarterbacks, etc, would likely even struggles against a relatively weak NFL team of today’s standards, simply because of the advantages the current team would have against them. After all, one of the biggest aspects of any competition is preparation, and it’s impossible to accurately prepare for or simulate attributes you haven’t even become familiar with yet. By Einstein’s theory of relativity. So too do I believe that this philosophy in many ways applies to the Sweet Science as well….

It goes without saying that mastery of the fundamental rudiments of pugilism guarantee longevity for a fighter far more than athleticism ever will, given the factors of age, wear-and-tear and general dissipation. The legendary Bernard Hopkins’ career has served as a divine testament to just how far a fighter’s ring IQ can take him with the absence of any extraordinary size, speed or power, having both the distinctions as the longest-reigning Middleweight champion in boxing history, as well as the oldest recognized world champion in all of sports history, defeating Jean Pascal at a boxer’s fossil age of 49 to become the WBC Light Heavyweight champion. He first gained his stamp of worldwide approval in the sport at age 36, using his guile and savvy to upset, dominate and ultimately knock out the then unbeaten, power-punching sensation Felix Trinidad, and after jumping two weight classes to defeat heavily favored Light Heavyweight champion Antonio Tarver, Hopkins even went on to earn another milestone for beating then unbeaten, powerful Middleweight Champion Kelly Pavlik, in a fight that marked the second largest age disparity between two opponents where the elder fighter was the winner (The official record held by George Foreman’s historic KO victory over Michael Moorer, who reigned as the unbeaten WBA and IBF Heavyweight champion at age 26, facing a 45-year-old Foreman), with Pavlik being 26 and B-Hop being 43 at the time. Youth can indeed be overcome by experience and general know-how…

The flip side of this argument however, could be that for all Bernard’s storied success, his downfalls all generally came against athletically superior opponents, all of which he was fundamentally superior to, from his very first loss coming to a natural Light Heavyweight Clinton Mitchell, the other-worldly speed of a young Roy Jones, the youth, speed and lengthy, powerful jab of Jermain Taylor, the utter speed and agility of Joe Calzaghe snapping his unbeaten streak against southpaws, the size, speed and strength of Chad Dawson, and the towering, rangy power of Sergey Kovalev. None of the above have ever been argued to be ahead of B-Hop by way of core technique or fundamentals. All were athletically superior, and all own victories over him as a result. Jean Pascal is far from Hopkins in the fundamentals department, and actually owns two knockdowns against the great defensive strategist. And let’s also not forget the vital aspect of Bernard’s youthful conditioning, stemming from a disciplined and near monastic lifestyle. Conditioning also relates to athleticism. Had Bernard not faced so many athletically superior opponents, he may have the additional milestone of being the oldest fighter in history to maintain an unbeaten record….

The previous argument could be made for any range of fighters between Jack Johnson being stopped against the height advantage he found himself up against facing Jess Willard, to Archie Moore’s KO losses to Floyd Patterson, Juan Manuel Marquez’s early loss to Freddie Norwood, James Toney’s one-sided loss to Roy Jones, etc. In fact, Salvador Sanchez stopped Danny Lopez using the same exact fighting style and fight plan that the much shorter Ruben Olivares was stopped attempting to use against Lopez, if anyone ever noticed. Athleticism has always allowed certain fighters to override their particular flaws and have prosperous careers. Just as the saying goes that “those who can’t do, teach”, there are many fighters with excellent ring IQ’s who lacked any special athletic qualities to get the job done. The key is whether or not a fighter knows how to fully utilize his athletic strength. A fighter like Paul Williams was a terror on his athletic qualities alone, even with the flaws of constantly giving up his height to shorter opponents and leading with his chin over his front foot. A fighter like Lennox Lewis, Tommy Hearns or Vladimir Klitschko had much more career success and dominance by understanding how to use their tools properly. Therefore, there’s no denying that know-how does play a pivotal role as well….

It’s for these reasons that I cannot blindly dismiss athletic factors in hypothetical fantasy fights and automatically give the nod to every fighter of the fundamentally dominant era over the athletically dominant era. All fighters are vulnerable to the difficulties of dealing with elements they aren’t accustomed to, and certain elements of the fight game have evolved over time, at least from the size and speed aspects of things. So while I respectfully dispute the notion that any era of boxing was necessarily “better” than another, I also believe that there’s a fine line between being the “greatest of all time”, and being the “greatest of YOUR time”.

Signing off until next time….

[si-contact-form form=’2′]