On Prospect Analysis - A Guide to Tools vs Skills vs Attributes
I'm hoping to make a regular feature of this site where I analyze certain boxing prospects, and maybe compare and contrast some up and coming guys in various weight classes. Unlike most major sports, there's no set system of prospect analysis in boxing. In baseball, every scout looks at the 5 tools on a 20-80 scouting scale. In football, there are hundreds of sites anayzing high school and college athletes who might become pros someday. In boxing, you see a fighter and you just get excited. What I'd like to attempt to do is break down up-and-coming fighters, so we know what their current and future strengths and weaknesses might be. I think there are three important factors here:
- Tools - These are the physical gifts that the boxer is born with, the things you can't teach.
- Skills - These are the things a fighter is able to learn with training, items they can generally improve upon over time.
- Attributes - These are somewhere in between tools and skills - not necessarily physical, but things that come within the boxer's personality.
Tools
Handspeed - Good handspeed can be very important. If you have it, your combinations look flashier and are more likely to impress the judges. Perhaps more importantly, if your handspeed is better than your opponent's, you'll beat your opponent to the punch
Chin -Just ask Amir Khan what it means if you have shaky whiskers. A fighter with a bad chin is a lot more likely to get knocked down or out, and thus lose. There are ways to compensate for it, as Wlad Klitschko and Tommy Hearns discovered, but the lack of a chin is probably one of the top reasons seemingly good prospects end up flaming out, just after failure to put the work in.
Reflexes -Quick reflexes can help both sides of a boxers game. If they're able to move quickly, it makes it easier to time a flaw in the opponent, or to react and counter if there's an opening. It also makes it easier for a fighter to pick off or
Power - By power, I mean one punch concussive power. Accumulative power is good, but you can get there by combining their power and their workrate. One punch power means you're always in the fight, because if you can just land that one punch, you can still win it.
Size - They say you can't teach size, which generally is true, but this one's a bit tricky in boxing. As a guy is moving up the ranks, a lot of the time he'll fight at a higher weight class than where he'll end up. A guy will have better size if, after they're rehydrated, they have the physical and reach advantages in the ring.
Hand - Southpaws have a small inherent advantage, just because most fighters aren't used to fighting southpaws, and because it's difficult to find good, skilled sparring partners who are southpaws.
Skills and attributes come after the jump.
Skills
Defense - You know the difference between a fighter who blocks punches with his fists and one who blocks punches with his face, and you know which one usually wins (some freaks of nature aside). However, this tends to be a skill that lags behind and thus is hard to evaluate. A lot of trainers just focus on offense first, or just plain don't know how to train defense well.
Ring generalship - How well is a fighter able to get his opponent to fight his fight. This too can take time to develop. If a fighter has picked up some of the dirty tricks of the trade, this may show up here as well.
Footwork - The lack of good footwork out of a lot of recent prospects can be maddening. While it's not the most important of the skills, good footwork allows a fighter to properly take advantage of their tools - they're in position to take advantage of their reflexes, they have their feet set at the right times to take advantage of their power, and they're in better position to take advantage of their handspeed. In really bad cases, like Yuriorkis Gamboa, bad footwork can even lead to getting knocked down, simple because the fighter is off balance so much of the time.
Head/Body Movement - While some of this does tie into overall quickness, it's just much harder to hit a moving target, and if a fighter's always moving, then it can compensate somewhat for a lack of quickness or reflexes.
Endurance - While there certainly is an aspect of this that is more like an attribute or a tool than a skill, endurance is something that can be learned in the ring. Generally, for prospects, this will be an X factor, because you haven't had the chance to see them slug it out for 12 rounds yet. Workrate factors in here as well.
Punching Ability - This could probably be broken down into a few different categories, but the most important aspects are accuracy, straightness of punches, and variance of offensive arsenal. You could also put the ability to throw combinations here, but that really is covered by all three of this, quickness, and footwork.
Attributes
Heart - Heart is how much someone's willing to put up with in the ring. A guy with great heart isn't going to quit in the ring. A guy with great heart isn't going to whine and moan and stop giving 100% just because he's hurt. Or in other words, Kermit Cintron is the Tin Man.
Desire - I think this gets confused with heart sometimes, but it's a little bit different. A fighter's desire level is how bad they want to be the best, and what they're willing to sacrifice and commit in order to be the best. A guy with tons of desire will train harder, work harder, put the rest of his life on hold for his career, and generally improve his skills faster. Also, heart + desire = mental toughness, which is something a prospect really needs to thrive in boxing.
Durability - This includes both durability inside and outside the ring. If someone cuts easily, that's a debit. If someone keeps injuring their hand, that's a debit. Not only does it mean they're not as likely to win an individual fight, but it also means they'll probably end up having fewer quality fights in their career, simply because they're waylaid for large chunks of time.
If I grade guys, it will be on an A to F scale, just because people generally know what that means and it seems a bit more natural to do it this way in boxing than to assign numbers. A would be great, B is above average, C is average, D is below average and F means it's a big enough issue that it will impede their ability to become a good fighter.
If you think I missed anything, or have any criticisms, feel free to contribute to the comments.
26 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
awesome
Really looking forward to it.
"If they cut my bald head open, they will find one big boxing glove. That's all I am. I live it." -- Marvin Hagler
i really have zero knowledge of any prospects unless they’ve reached the BAD/FNF stage of their career, so this could be a very helpful feature for me.
thanks brick, looking forward to further installments
The Dude Abides
by battle axe of doom on Apr 10, 2009 8:56 PM EDT reply actions
The difference between Heart and Desire, I think, comes in the form of Juan Diaz. Desire? Absolutely. Heart? A little less prominent.
Good call
Or the opposite might be Chris Arreola. Lots of heart but no desire.
Vogt early, Vogt often.
There are some guys though....
like Izzy Vasquez who kinda defy description though, you know? A guy who seems to really excel via the intangibles. Izzy is a bleeder, he gets dropped, he’s slow of foot, his defense leaves something to be desired, his technique can be slightly sloppy, he’s not very big even for his weight class … But he’s got some pop in those hands and the heart of a lion. But on paper, I dunno, he just isn’t that impressive. The guy won me over. Sadly, I have a strange feeling he won’t be back.
I think he'll be back for a fight or two
But he’ll never be the same fighter he was before the trilogy.
Vogt early, Vogt often.
I was in fight fan love with Izzy before the trilogy but always had him in the area of “hard to define.” I think he’ll come back. Like Brick said, though, I don’t think he’ll ever be the same.
"If they cut my bald head open, they will find one big boxing glove. That's all I am. I live it." -- Marvin Hagler
by Scott Christ on Apr 12, 2009 3:02 AM EDT up reply actions
Totally disagree on Diaz
Maybe that argument’s legit after Campbell, but not after JMM. Diaz fights to his(subjective) limit. He got knocked out. It’s a knock on his chin factor, not on heart or desire.
And I still say his limit seems to be reached precisely when he’s cut.
"If they cut my bald head open, they will find one big boxing glove. That's all I am. I live it." -- Marvin Hagler
by Scott Christ on Apr 13, 2009 2:31 AM EDT up reply actions
What about something like punch placement?
Something along the lines of how straight their punches are. Some guys have very poor fundamentals in punching. Long looping shots are usually not better then straight short punches.
perfect example of that: wide punches of miranda vs the straighter punches of pavlik. that should definitely be a subcategory under Skills
The Dude Abides
by battle axe of doom on Apr 11, 2009 1:20 AM EDT up reply actions
yeah I should have put examples.
Peters vs Chambers also falls under category of wide vs straight.
Good overview, and I’m looking forward to the series.
I do believe that both power and reflexes can be taught somewhat. Good trainers can correct poor punching styles, and there are techniques for developing reflexes as well. Sure, there’s an intrinsic component to these qualities, but the same can be said, to some extent, to the qualities you list under “skills.”
There’s nothing wrong with generalizing to make a point or to forward discussion and analysis, but I would argue that nearly all of these qualities exist as shades of gray between teachable and intrinsic qualities.
That said, I’m definitely looking forward to your future articles on boxing prospects. You have a good eye for these things, Brick, and your experience watching the untelevised live fights on undercards is a hell of a lot more extensive than my own. Great idea for a series.
Boxing writer: "Iran, what are you going to do when you retire?"
Iran Barkley: "Rob your house"
There's a lot of overlap
and a lot of gray area in each of these. For example, one of the things I personally think is most important is workrate, yet I don’t have a separate category for it, since workrate is really a combination between a fighter’s endurance, heart, footwork, handspeed and punching ability.
I’ll probably start with a few guys people have seen before. While I do scout around for prospect fights on the net, it’s not like I get secret videos of fights that people taped on their cellphones at clubfights or anything like that.
Vogt early, Vogt often.
I think one of the most overlooked things that aren’t discussed is the ability to fight while hurt. Some guys when you knock them down or get the cut… they fold because they can’t clinch or weather the storm.
I look at Marquez, and he has been down before but he manages to get himself together and finish the round. Adamek seems to fight better when he is hurt. Some other guys just don’t know what to do when they are hurt.
All of this is related to heart… but it is also related to ring smarts.
"Boxing is dirty," said Casamayor. " The day I’m not ready to be a dirty fighter is the day I don’t fight anymore because it will mean that I have no heart for it anymore."
That's part of heart, IMO
Sorry if I didn’t make that clear.
A lot of what I think people call heart is really just pain tolerance though. Everyone has a naturally different pain threshold, and those with a higher pain threshold will be able to fight through more.
Vogt early, Vogt often.
Great ideas
I definitely love the idea, especially as — like someone pointed out earlier — I don’t get a chance to see much from anyone who hasn’t made it to WNF/FNF/BAD.
Obviously, as lots of people have mentioned, these are all very subjective terms. Anything is better than nothing, though, and I think the collective inspection of all of these could paint a pretty good picture of a prospect. At the very least, they can raise red flags so we know what a fighter must improve upon or adapt to before he can truly be a contender.
One thing, though. I think you should definitely give a presentation of fighting style for each prospect you evaluate, as this GREATLY affects the impact that all of the tools/skills/attributes have on their success, and even the meaning of some of these categories. For example, defining what “good” Ring Generalship and Footwork are changes completely when you’re looking at a stalking pressure fighter vs. slick counterpunchers vs. tall, rangy types who control with distance and the jab, etc. Try to give us an idea of how these prospects fight, and we can combine that with these skills/etc. in order to really see who they are and what kind of success they can expect.
I also agree with TXRoyal in saying that their general technique should also be looked at (fundamentals in punching, blocking, etc., though you have these partially covered in other areas). Then again, that could just as easily be included in an analysis of their styles.
Detroit, huh?
Other side of the state. Welcome to BLH, dude.
"If they cut my bald head open, they will find one big boxing glove. That's all I am. I live it." -- Marvin Hagler
by Scott Christ on Apr 12, 2009 2:50 AM EDT up reply actions

by 



















