“the eye test” is the dumbest thing ppl bring up in boxing discussions

spacetime said:
News to me. Canelo failed the eye test because why? Didn't sit down on his punches enough?
Click to expand...
for me he didn't look very well taught and not passionate, but that was only from watching him hitting the heavybag before the mayweather fight, i haven't watched much if any of his fights completely. The problem is, people who aren't familiar with the sport or are young fans, they don't really know what looks right and what doesn't. I remember harold conrad describing the first time he saw Ali, it was sparring with ingemar johannson in around 62, he said once he saw his jab, he knew the guy was special and then explained that being around for so long, he just knew, he was right.
 
toogreen said:
anyone can look like a phenom if they’re matched properly
Click to expand...

Ignoring your eyes is dumber. How do you know if anyone is good without your eyes? And if you don't know if anyone is good, how do you know if a win is a good win?
 
.
mozfonky said:
for me he didn't look very well taught and not passionate, but that was only from watching him hitting the heavybag before the mayweather fight, i haven't watched much if any of his fights completely. The problem is, people who aren't familiar with the sport or are young fans, they don't really know what looks right and what doesn't. I remember harold conrad describing the first time he saw Ali, it was sparring with ingemar johannson in around 62, he said once he saw his jab, he knew the guy was special and then explained that being around for so long, he just knew, he was right.
Click to expand...

Ali failed the eye test for me against Doug Jones. I don't blame Liston for taking him lightly.
 
spacetime said:
.


Ali failed the eye test for me against Doug Jones. I don't blame Liston for taking him lightly.
Click to expand...
he did for a lot of people at the time because he was so unusual, only after his career was over did that style look common, ali really had an uphill battle but there were some who really thought he was special right from the gitgo. One guy, Skeeter Mclure, his olympic teamate even said the first time he saw Ali that he had a divine glow to him. You are correct though, the old boxing men who used to sit ringside as Clay sparred couldn't be blamed for saying "he's gonna get moidered".

I grew up on the old ali so i was mesmerized the first time i saw 60's ali playing on a laser disc in a dept. store, not the same guy i grew up watching, it was the first liston fight and I think it was the second cooper fight that i watched, probably in total, my life was changed that day as much as any, in terms of what I wanted to do. I stood there with my mouth open.
 
mozfonky said:
he did for a lot of people at the time because he was so unusual, only after his career was over did that style look common, ali really had an uphill battle but there were some who really thought he was special right from the gitgo. One guy, Skeeter Mclure, his olympic teamate even said the first time he saw Ali that he had a divine glow to him. You are correct though, the old boxing men who used to sit ringside as Clay sparred couldn't be blamed for saying "he's gonna get moidered".
Click to expand...

There's also a distinction that often gets blurred between ring craftmanship vs technique. A boxer who had sparred both Foreman and Wladimir Klitchko was asked to compare their jabs. His answer was that Foremans was much more powerful but Klitchkos you couldn't get away from. That's the difference between technique and ring craftmanship.
 
mozfonky said:
he did for a lot of people at the time because he was so unusual, only after his career was over did that style look common, ali really had an uphill battle but there were some who really thought he was special right from the gitgo. One guy, Skeeter Mclure, his olympic teamate even said the first time he saw Ali that he had a divine glow to him. You are correct though, the old boxing men who used to sit ringside as Clay sparred couldn't be blamed for saying "he's gonna get moidered".

I grew up on the old ali so i was mesmerized the first time i saw 60's ali playing on a laser disc in a dept. store, not the same guy i grew up watching, it was the first liston fight and I think it was the second cooper fight that i watched, probably in total, my life was changed that day as much as any, in terms of what I wanted to do. I stood there with my mouth open.
Click to expand...

He also performed poorly in that fight which is partly attributed to Jones
 
Last edited:
spacetime said:
He also performed poorly in that fight which is partly attributed to Jones
Click to expand...
i know you didn't see it live did you? unless your 80 years old. Yes, ali looked beatable in the jones fight, in sonny banks and cooper fights where he was knocked down, it actually helped him because sonny didn't know what was coming his way and by most accounts trained for a 3 round fight. Some still say that sonny in top shape would have beaten him, yes, they said that since that time. I doubt it though, Ali was improving rapidly during his first tenure as Heavyweight champ, he was hated, at least in part, because he was so unbeatable. He rematched cooper and it was a different story, probably would have been different had he rematched doug jones but jones lost to someone, forget who, maybe chuvalo. Most prospects do have a fight or two where they look bad, it doesn't prove much, its' what happens in the overall career that counts. Anyone can have a bad night and probably less than 3 percent of boxers come in the ring at 100 percent.
 
stuff jones said:
Ignoring your eyes is dumber. How do you know if anyone is good without your eyes? And if you don't know if anyone is good, how do you know if a win is a good win?
Click to expand...
I think eye test is different than just watching the fight, its watching a fighter fight then assuming they’re world class

I go by the record, the level of opponent that they fight and if they can do it repeatedly.

like I thought Loma was good because of his amateur record and how he won a title so quickly, not because he looked flashy
 
Last edited:
toogreen said:
I think eye test is different than just watching the fight, its watching a fighter fight then assuming they’re world class

I go by the record, the level of opponent that they fight and if they can do it repeatedly.

like I thought Loma was good because of his amateur record and how he won a title so quickly, not because he looked flashy
Click to expand...

Again, how do you know the level of the opponent without watching them? Because of who they beat? How do you know the level of opponents they beat? Because of who they beat? Without your eyes, that will just repeat to until you have a bunch of meaningless records.
 
stuff jones said:
Again, how do you know the level of the opponent without watching them? Because of who they beat? How do you know the level of opponents they beat? Because of who they beat? Without your eyes, that will just repeat to until you have a bunch of meaningless records.
Click to expand...
you’re just being pedantic now, no one means watching fights when they say eye test

guys like max kellerman use it to hype up a fighter and they cant think of an argument they just say, eye test. its an opinion, whatever kind of style someone likes would pass their eye test.
 
toogreen said:
you’re just being pedantic now, no one means watching fights when they say eye test

guys like max kellerman use it to hype up a fighter and they cant think of an argument they just say, eye test. its an opinion, whatever kind of style someone likes would pass their eye test.
Click to expand...

All I'm saying is that the idea that we just judge people based on who they've beaten is circular logic. At some point someone has to be an inherently good fighter based on the eye test otherwise they are not a good win and the whole who you beat thing doesnt work.
 
stuff jones said:
Ignoring your eyes is dumber. How do you know if anyone is good without your eyes? And if you don't know if anyone is good, how do you know if a win is a good win?
Click to expand...
I don’t think most people understand the eyes is what relays messages to the brain, how you perceive things is from the eyes first . It’s why a smart blind man who followed boxing would not predict fights correctly over even a dumb man who doesn’t but can take time to watch some fights . lol

In other words everyone is using the eye tests they just don’t know it ,some are just able to process the information delivered far better to the brain of what’s real and what not , what’s closer to reality and what’s a little off , etc, etc .
 
Last edited:
Wouldn’t say it’s dumb but it’s absolutely miles behind C.V.
 
tenor.gif
 
The eye test is more easily applied in sports like boxing compared to sports like basketball, generally as a function of the number of variables you need to be able to juggle in your head in real-time (or even with tape and slower/more-intentional scouting), and the number of moving parts going on at a given time.

In most of the social sciences, the best research is done with combinations of qualitative and quantitative evidence, ideally multiple forms of evidence triangulating around a common conclusion. If the eye test is matching other forms of evidence, you are almost certainly on the right track. If not, something is likely to need revision.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,236,980
Messages
55,459,036
Members
174,787
Latest member
Freddie556

Share this page

Back
Top