Dmitry Bivol Technical Flaws

Hes top 5

 

Bivol of course beat Canelo, but his win against Zurdo IMO is quite underrated.

Bivol is a top fighter in the technical area honestly - his fundamentals are exceptional. I just think Beterbiev's style is the worst type of style for Bivol to go against and Beterbiev is literally the best at that particular style ITW ATM, and even a lot of people thought Bivol won the fight against Beterbiev.

 

What he does, he does exceptionally well even if he doesn’t have a big variety in his arsenal. Makes it hard to rate him as a “technician”. He also has a bit of awkwardness to his punches (specifically the hook).

I think his best asset is his discipline and cool-headedness. He just doesn’t let his opponents get him out of his game.

Canelo tried to goad him in, he kept his range, stuck to 3-4 punches at a time.

Beterbiev pressed him and rough housed him, he kept his high guard up and got back to range.

If anything, I think he should have answered back against Beterbiev a little sooner the few times Beter opened up on him.. but he was content to keep the guard up, slide out and go back to doing what he does.

 

He is offensively less talented than Usyk and Crawford.

Bivol is probably the best pure boxer in the game. He doesn't have Usyk's left hand nor Crawford's right hand.

What he does have is a strong understanding of fundamentals, keeping things relatively simple and sticking to what he knows.

In the rematch, he needs to fire 3-4 shots and then get out of range. He can't trade with the beast. He does not have the offensive variety of an Opetaia whereby he can engage for long periods.

Jab, cross and left hook - he knows those 3 punches well and he sticks to them. He doesn't have a great uppercut in either hand.

The reason he is praised for his technical ability is due to not having great offense.

 

Most. Pep, Whittaker, Billy Conn, Tunney and a few others were mostly defensive.

Mayweather, in his younger years, had a lot of offensive ability. He could throw hard right hand leads - something most purely defensive boxers just can't do.

 

With all due respect, I disagree with your assessment. Bivol is basically a busier, less cautious version of Shakur with slightly lesser defense but more output. Bivol has exceptional defense, can fight from all ranges, the best jab, and his chin is proven. You used Crawford and Usyk as a measuring stick but I do not believe Crawford or Usyk has faced any fighter on the level of a Canelo, Beterbiev, or even a Zurdo.

Usyk best wins are against Fury, Aj, and Breidis.
AJ had already lost
Fury lost to a UFC fighter
And Breidis was always overrated to me.

Every fighter Crawford fought was either past their prime, had already lost, or were never great in the first place. Of course Usyk and Crawford would look better than Bivol since they haven't fought the same quality of opposition. Let's take Crawfords last performance against a somewhat slick fighter, he didn't look that great. Now let's say Crawford fought a 154 version of Bivol, he probably gets outboxed, duento Bivol being a level above Madrimov.
I would say Bivol is a top 5 fighter in the skills department

 

Floyd would be the best offensive fighter had he fought today

 

Floyd had very good offense. But best offensive fighter today? Not sure. Canelo has outstanding offense. Left hook, right hand, right uppercut, left uppercut.

Opetaia has amazing offense too.

Beterbiev has other wordly power.

 

It's largely a result of fans exaggerating his win against Canelo. Instead of people seeing it as the close 7-5 type decision that it was, you have fans (due to their hate of Canelo) arguing that it was a 10-2 or even wider. That sort of thing results in a fighter being overrated.

So fans need to come back to earth and recognize that "smaller" Canelo (not weaker) was able to have more success against Bivol than anyone else. In rounds 1-4 Canelo was landing hard shots on Bivol and was on his way to beating him, before fatigue set in and Bivol took advantage. Even Beterbiev who beat Bivol was seen as a highly controversial decision with many on here thinking Bivol deserved to win. Beterbiev didn't land the kind of shots Canelo did, despite being the much bigger man. "Little" Canelo rattled Bivol's cage to a much greater extent than Beterbiev did but no one on here will admit it due to their irrational hate of Canelo. That's what all this is about.

Canelo Bivol was also a much more entertaining fight than Bivol Beterbiev, which was basically a sparing session snoozefest. Canelo actually took the fight to Bivol and stood right in front of him giving him various forms of high level defense even when fatigued, like a true warrior.

 

I'd say he actually has quite a bit of variety to him. Against Canelo he was the aggressor, but smart agression, never letting Canelo get settled, flooding him with combinations. Against Beterbiev he was forced onto the back foot for most of the fight and turned mainly into a counter puncher (and did enough to win imo) Against Zurdo he had a significant height/reach disadvantage and so did more dipping beneath punches and hitting to the body. He adapts pretty well in every fight.

I'd say in terms of whose boxing is most effective, Usyk is number one; in terms of 'pure boxing' I'd say Shakur is the best (although needs some better opponents to show it); Inoue is the best in terms of offensive skill. (Crawford is just a weight bully.) But Bivol has maybe the best fundamentals of any of them, and probably adapts his style better than any of them. So it's hard to rate them, they are each best at different things. Defo not overrated tho, Bivol is a great technician.

 

He did flood him with combinations but he wasn't the aggressor. Canelo was the aggressor for much of the fight, he took the fight to Bivol and forced Bivol to cover up on the ropes on several occassions. Or did you forget that? How often was Bivol forced back to the ropes to cover-up against Beterbiev?