"Boxing: 90-95% belief, 5-10% physical" Do you agree?

HovaBaby

I am pondering this question. Watching Mayweather-Ortiz 24/7, Floyd enquired to himself what got him what he wanted, how he got his 41-0 record, and he said: Belief.

I've also seen guys like Mike Tyson making the statement in my topic title, that boxing is 90-95% belief. He was saying about how the only reason the body is there for it so it can carry the brain, that the brain is the main "piece of equipment", so to say. Also I heard Muhammad Ali say on a chat show I saw on youtube about when he started to really believe in himself things started to happen.

I am not sure, whether talent is the only factor in making a fighters great, or belief. Like you have a fighter like Mayweather (I know his quote above), but people look at him like his talent is why he is so great. His speed, reflexes, technique. But then you have a fighter like Rocky Marciano, who is thought of as winning by heart and will alone almost, people don't think he is very skillful. Cus D'Amato said to Tyson that Marciano was unbeatable because of his unbendable will.

Or with Ali, from 1960-67 he was Cassius Clay/Ali. He had the speed of foot and his movements, he was able to stay away from his opponets. Then when his feet were gone he still beat the likes of Frazier, Foreman, Lyle, Shavers, etc. I think the Ali of the 70's would have beaten Sonny Liston, Floyd Patterson ('65 version), Cleveland Williams. It begs the question? Was his speed from the 60's really a definining feature, ie "talent". Cus D'Amato said too that it was Ali's character that made his the force he was.

What do you guys think?

walshb

To the untrained eye Marciano may have appeared less skilled that others. Watch him closely and he has fine skills. Feints, dips, ducks, angles. Throws punches from all angles; can switch his shots very accurately too.

Belief only gets you so far. Physically some people are made to box, like others are made to run, jump, swin etc.

Yes, to be a great you need will, heart, desire and intangibles. This we all know.

HovaBaby

What if the people who seem to have an aptitude for boxing have no will or heart? You can be very skillful but that is not the whole deal IMO.

walshb

HovaBaby wrote: »

What if the people who seem to have an aptitude for boxing have no will or heart? You can be very skillful but that is not the whole deal IMO.

Yes, you also need confidence and heart, chin etc. The intangibles.

cowzerp

Heart and desire tend to be what separated the good from the great but boxing is incredibly physical so it's certainly not only 10% physical, I round say both are needed equally to be top level, lots of skill can get you far as can lots of heart but when you meet someone with both game over.

boxer.fan

I have trained with numerous people who have all the skill in the world, endless talent, put them in a ring and they become less than average. On the other side, there have been those that start out very unassuming, but when they climb through the ropes something happens and they always out do their ability. Every now and again you get someone with buckets of both sides of the spectrum and are a bit special. So i would say that it is very much a 50-50 spread of belief and skill at elite level.

horsemeat

it's easy for someone like mayweather to say that as well. he's got all the talent in the world and it all comes so easy and so natural to him that it is like he doesn't have to work on the physical side of it, he just needs the psychological part to be maximised. when you're that good a bit of confidence can be the difference, but I mean in general it's a misnomer. Not everyone is blessed with mayweather reflexes, and for them it certainly would be a case of having to put in the hard graft.

corny

horsemeat wrote: »

it's easy for someone like mayweather to say that as well. he's got all the talent in the world and it all comes so easy and so natural to him that it is like he doesn't have to work on the physical side of it, he just needs the psychological part to be maximised. when you're that good a bit of confidence can be the difference, but I mean in general it's a misnomer. Not everyone is blessed with mayweather reflexes, and for them it certainly would be a case of having to put in the hard graft.

This raises the question are you born with 'talent' or can it be nurtured? I've always been interested by Judit Polgar and her sisters. Brief synopsis- herself and her sisters were groomed from childhood to play chess because their father believed 'Geniuses are made, not born'. Basically they were an experiment. Anyway it worked and she's the easily the best woman player in history. Her sisters aren't half bad either.

I know thats about as far removed from boxing as you can get but it proves whats possible with practice and dedication from a young age. For me the mind is the driving force no matter what sport you're talking about. Putting a percentage on it? Well if those that have reached the top are willing to put it at 90% then thats good enough for me. It doesn't surprise me.

gene_tunney

corny wrote: »

This raises the question are you born with 'talent' or can it be nurtured? I've always been interested by Judit Polgar and her sisters. Brief synopsis- herself and her sisters were groomed from childhood to play chess because their father believed 'Geniuses are made, not born'. Basically they were an experiment. Anyway it worked and she's the easily the best woman player in history. Her sisters aren't half bad either.

I know thats about as far removed from boxing as you can get but it proves whats possible with practice and dedication from a young age. For me the mind is the driving force no matter what sport you're talking about. Putting a percentage on it? Well if those that have reached the top are willing to put it at 90% then thats good enough for me. It doesn't surprise me.

Read this book:

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Bounce-Myth-Talent-Power-Practice/dp/0007350546/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1323998739&sr=8-1

It's a great read and you would be very interested in it I'd say!

corny

gene_tunney wrote: »

Read this book:

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Bounce-Myth-Talent-Power-Practice/dp/0007350546/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1323998739&sr=8-1

It's a great read and you would be very interested in it I'd say!

Yeah i've heard its good but i'm hardly prolific when it comes to the reading unfortunately. I've been at Nicolas Roches autobiography for 2 months now and i'm only half way through it. Riveting stuff mind you.:)

NV011956

horsemeat wrote: »

it's easy for someone like mayweather to say that as well. he's got all the talent in the world and it all comes so easy and so natural to him that it is like he doesn't have to work on the physical side of it, he just needs the psychological part to be maximised. when you're that good a bit of confidence can be the difference, but I mean in general it's a misnomer. Not everyone is blessed with mayweather reflexes, and for them it certainly would be a case of having to put in the hard graft.

While I agree with you for the most part, to say it comes easily to Mayweather is wrong IMO. He is generally seen as one of the most dedicated fighters out there. Never out of shape. He also has the reflexes and natural ability, but he works damn hard at it.
I would say BHop is a prime example of someone who isn't the most gifted fighter (good physical attributes, but not a Mayweather or Jones Jr) out there, but works extremly hard. However, its his mental strength that sets him apart. He is a classic case of the total package being greater than the sum of the parts.
I'm trying to think of someone who made it to the top on pure talent. Can't think of anyone that fits the bill yet. Anyone got any ideas?

walshb

horsemeat wrote: »

it's easy for someone like mayweather to say that as well. he's got all the talent in the world and it all comes so easy and so natural to him that it is like he doesn't have to work on the physical side of it, he just needs the psychological part to be maximised. when you're that good a bit of confidence can be the difference, but I mean in general it's a misnomer. Not everyone is blessed with mayweather reflexes, and for them it certainly would be a case of having to put in the hard graft.

Exactly how I see it. You must possess the physical skills in abundance. You cannot be physically ok, mentally perfect, if you want to be great. I think it is a case of physically 'top notch' and mentally sound or stable to make a great fighter.

Physicality also includes the chin and the abilty to take a shot and recover quickly. That is not a mental or belief trait.

HovaBaby

Larry Merchant said that the chin could be indictive of a fighters will to take a punch and come back from it.

cowzerp

HovaBaby wrote: »

Larry Merchant said that the chin could be indictive of a fighters will to take a punch and come back from it.

Chin is mainly a born trait, obviously having courage helps but if your out your courage means nothing, what Larry Merchant is actually taklking about is heart.

walshb

And, chin is not exact either. There are two types. A man who takes a whack because his chin or head is just solid, and a man who takes a shot, is hurt, but has the conditioning, stamina and recuperative abilities to shake it off quickly

Chuvalo is the former, and Calzaghe is the latter.

walshb

HovaBaby wrote: »

Or with Ali, from 1960-67 he was Cassius Clay/Ali. He had the speed of foot and his movements, he was able to stay away from his opponets. Then when his feet were gone he still beat the likes of Frazier, Foreman, Lyle, Shavers, etc. I think the Ali of the 70's would have beaten Sonny Liston, Floyd Patterson ('65 version), Cleveland Williams. It begs the question? Was his speed from the 60's really a definining feature, ie "talent". Cus D'Amato said too that it was Ali's character that made his the force he was.
?

That fantasy match has been mentioned; Ali from the 70s vs any version of Liston.

My take. Ali from the 70s still beats ANY Liston, because Ali from the early 70s was not just very good, but also ultra tough. He still had fast hands, and good movement, but was so strong and experienced. Liston would have a better shot (as opposed to the 60s version Clay/Ali), but I believe he still will not break the spirit and desrire of the older and mentally tougher Ali.

ROCKMAN

Basic's and Technique's can be taught ,Skill is the level at which these are mastered and applied . Belief is something although personnal , that can and will grow with experience ....but Heart is something of a mystery ,something your born with , something on a very personally level ,something deep down inside individuals that all the training in the world will not instil in someone , its that extra factor that's the difference between greats/champions and the rest IMO.

colly10

Ali has said before -

The fight is won or lost far away from witnesses - behind the lines, in the gym, and out there on the road, long before I dance under those lights.

I've beat a guy far above my own standard because I was training 5 days a week at the time. I had the keys to the club and was down there any time I could.
Belief and heart are very important in boxing but I think conditioning and skill are the most important things

ROCKMAN

colly10 wrote: »

Ali has said before -



I've beat a guy far above my own standard because I was training 5 days a week at the time. I had the keys to the club and was down there any time I could.
Belief and heart are very important in boxing but I think conditioning and skill are the most important things

But is it not " Heart " that gives the individual the willpower to put in that extra effort in the gym and on the roads .

All been equal ,weight ,skill level ,fitness etc etc ,Its the one that wants it more (i.e Heart ) that normally will come out on top .imo

walshb

ROCKMAN wrote: »

All been equal ,weight ,skill level ,fitness etc etc ,Its the one that wants it more (i.e Heart ) that normally will come out on top .imo

That is just it, ALL things being eual and then the belief and heart etc play its part, but first, the skills and talent need to be top notch. Two fighters suare off and one is a league or two ahead physically and skillfully, then it's most likely that they prevail regardless of the heart and will of the opponent.

Take Gatti-Mayweather. Gattih had the heart and will and desire, but he was a notch or two below Mayweather and got hammered before heart and will could even come into effect. Mayweathre did not need to display heart and dseire and courage, as he was so good physically, that he could win whilst in 2nd or third gear.

tryingmybestt

Skill only comes into it when both boxers are in prime physical condition...

9 times out of 10 the fit unskilled boxer will beat the unfit skilled boxer

Skill comes into it when both boxers are fit

A characteristic of a champion is determination and perseverence and when someone has these qualities then they have the commitment to also train hard and become superfit....hence it is very rare that you find a great champion that is not a great trainier e.g. Ali, Tyson. Tszyu, Morales, McGuigan, De La Hoya etc. etc.

HovaBaby

walshb wrote: »

That is just it, ALL things being eual and then the belief and heart etc play its part, but first, the skills and talent need to be top notch. Two fighters suare off and one is a league or two ahead physically and skillfully, then it's most likely that they prevail regardless of the heart and will of the opponent.

Take Gatti-Mayweather. Gattih had the heart and will and desire, but he was a notch or two below Mayweather and got hammered before heart and will could even come into effect. Mayweathre did not need to display heart and dseire and courage, as he was so good physically, that he could win whilst in 2nd or third gear.

What if Rocky Marciano fought a very skillful fighter? I know what you said in Marciano's skills were subtle, but what what if he fought a fighter who an audience would say "Damn, he's skillfull."

walshb

HovaBaby wrote: »

What if Rocky Marciano fought a very skillful fighter? I know what you said in Marciano's skills were subtle, but what what if he fought a fighter who an audience would say "Damn, he's skillfull."

Eh, what was Ezzard Charles and JJW?

HovaBaby

So that is a less skillfull fighter beating a more skillfull fighter.

walshb

HovaBaby wrote: »

So that is a less skillfull fighter beating a more skillfull fighter.

Skill is a trait or quality that is subjective. Yes, I think JJW and Charles were IMO more skilled in the boxing sense. Anyway, I am not sure what you are getting at? Rocky was no slouch skill wise or any other wise

Yes, sometimes a superior skilled fighter does not beat his foe. But, usually, when all things are NOT equal, raw skill and physical advantages will win thru. I gave the Gatti-Mayweather example. Plenty more.

Who was more skilled? Ali or Tyson? SRL or SRR? Monzon or Hagler? I would not argue too much either way for any.

Manny or Floyd? Again, most would probably jump in and say Floyd. But, ask them why, and ask them to break it down and then it is not always so clear.

tryingmybestt

walshb wrote: »

Skill is a trait or quality that is subjective. Yes, I think JJW and Charles were IMO more skilled in the boxing sense. Anyway, I am not sure what you are getting at? Rocky was no slouch skill wise or any other wise

Yes, sometimes a superior skilled fighter does not beat his foe. But, usually, when all things are equal, raw skill and physical advantages will win thru. I gave ther Gatti-Mayweather example. Plenty more.

Who was more skilled? Ali or Tyson? SRL or SRR? Monzon or Hagler? I would not argue too much either way for any.

Manny or Floyd? Again, most would probably jump in and say Floyd. But, ask them why, and ask them to break it down and then it is not always so clear.

Floyd is more skillful than pacman because:

better footwork
more skillfull defence
better counter puncher
more precise puncher
more adaptable, able to change gameplan during fight e.g. against Judah. Pacman is unable to do so during fight e.g. Marquez + Mosley



[/LIST]

walshb

tryingmybestt wrote: »

Floyd is more skillful than pacman because:

better footwork....subjective. Manny's feet are brilliant. Uses them differently
more skillfull defence....... Manny is an offensive fighter. Takes a lot more risks.better counter puncher. Manny is not a counter puncher; style issue that
more precise puncher. Yes. This I agree with
more adaptable, able to change gameplan during fight e.g. against Judah. Pacman is unable to do so during fight e.g. Marquez + Mosley. Manny like many greats can adapt. Far too subjective this category



[/LIST]

Good post

Dermighty

People say heart. I think heart = psychological toughness.

What makes you keep going if you're doing a circuit, or a run, or whatever. Whatever tells you to keep going is what those guys have in spades.