Ring Magazine fighters of the decade..
Heavyweight-Lennox Lewis
Cruiserweight-David Haye
Light heavyweight-Antonio Tarver
Super middleweight-Joe Calzaghe
Middleweight-Bernard Hopkins
Light middleweight-Winky Wright
Welterweight-Shane Mosley
Light welterweight-Kostya Tzuyu
Lightweights-Floyd Mayweather
Super featherweight-Manny Pacquiao
Featherweight-Juan Manuel Marquez
Super bantamweight-Israel Vazquez
Bantamweight-Rafael Marquez
Super flyweight-Vic Darchinyan
Flyweight-Pongsaklek Wonjongkam
Light flyweight-Ivan calderon
Strawweight-Ivan Calderon
Re: Ring Magazine fighters of the decade..
Good list but I can't agree with Marquez at Featherweight. He was beaten by Chris John (yes it was close but he still won) and John is undefeated and still a long time champ. Any doubts about him only fighting oversea's don't hold water after seeing him fight twice in the US.
Re: Ring Magazine fighters of the decade..
Antonio Tarver at lt heavy? Why not just give it to roy, granted he started slipping around 03/04 but still he had an awesome 3 years in the decade. didn't stop em giving it to lewis at heavy based on 3 years into the decade, and tszyu at 140 on 5 years. I guess decent enough list for the most part, and any list could be argued.
Re: Ring Magazine fighters of the decade..
Quote:
Originally Posted by
jdonaher1
Good list but I can't agree with Marquez at Featherweight. He was beaten by Chris John (yes it was close but he still won) and John is undefeated and still a long time champ. Any doubts about him only fighting oversea's don't hold water after seeing him fight twice in the US.
yea against Juarez, a guy Marquez had already previously whooped, and John barely got by both times (a clear win in a competitive fight the first time, and almost stopped in the rematch)
Re: Ring Magazine fighters of the decade..
Totally Disagree with Lennox as HW of the Decade, especially considering he fought only 3 of those years and they were by all accounts years past his prime.
Look at his record: Michael Grant, snoozer agaisnt David Tua, Frans Botha, KO LOSS to Rahman, a 12-years-past-his-prime Mike Tyson and the Vitali fight.
Give it to one of the Klitschkos, who were in their primes during this decade and ruled for much longer.
No disrespect to Lennox, who is one of the greatest HWs to ever grace the ring, but the 2000's weren't his decade.
Re: Ring Magazine fighters of the decade..
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Beanflicker
Totally Disagree with Lennox as HW of the Decade, especially considering he fought only 3 of those years and they were by all accounts years past his prime.
Look at his record: Michael Grant, snoozer agaisnt David Tua, Frans Botha, KO LOSS to Rahman, a 12-years-past-his-prime Mike Tyson and the Vitali fight.
Give it to one of the Klitschkos, who were in their primes during this decade and ruled for much longer.
No disrespect to Lennox, who is one of the greatest HWs to ever grace the ring, but the 2000's weren't his decade.
IMO neither were the 90's, i'd actually say Holyfield was the best HW of the 90's and Wlad the #1 HW from 2000-10
Re: Ring Magazine fighters of the decade..
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Beanflicker
Totally Disagree with Lennox as HW of the Decade, especially considering he fought only 3 of those years and they were by all accounts years past his prime.
Look at his record: Michael Grant, snoozer agaisnt David Tua, Frans Botha, KO LOSS to Rahman, a 12-years-past-his-prime Mike Tyson and the Vitali fight.
Give it to one of the Klitschkos, who were in their primes during this decade and ruled for much longer.
No disrespect to Lennox, who is one of the greatest HWs to ever grace the ring, but the 2000's weren't his decade.
As big of a LL fan I am I have to agree a fighter has to be around more then 3 years to be fighter of the decade...Though he is the best HW since Holmes all around
Re: Ring Magazine fighters of the decade..
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Beanflicker
Totally Disagree with Lennox as HW of the Decade, especially considering he fought only 3 of those years and they were by all accounts years past his prime.
Look at his record: Michael Grant, snoozer agaisnt David Tua, Frans Botha, KO LOSS to Rahman, a 12-years-past-his-prime Mike Tyson and the Vitali fight.
Give it to one of the Klitschkos, who were in their primes during this decade and ruled for much longer.
No disrespect to Lennox, who is one of the greatest HWs to ever grace the ring, but the 2000's weren't his decade.
Who has a better record than that?
Wlad's resume is crap.
Re: Ring Magazine fighters of the decade..
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Beanflicker
Totally Disagree with Lennox as HW of the Decade, especially considering he fought only 3 of those years and they were by all accounts years past his prime.
Look at his record: Michael Grant, snoozer agaisnt David Tua, Frans Botha, KO LOSS to Rahman, a 12-years-past-his-prime Mike Tyson and the Vitali fight.
Give it to one of the Klitschkos, who were in their primes during this decade and ruled for much longer.
No disrespect to Lennox, who is one of the greatest HWs to ever grace the ring, but the 2000's weren't his decade.
Who has a better record than that?
Wlad's resume is crap.
Wlad beat up both Botha and Rahman, Tyson was shot, and Tua nor Grant ever won a title, plus he has wins over Byrd, Peter, Brock, Ibragimov, Chagaev, and Chambers
so who honestly did more from 2000 onward?
Re: Ring Magazine fighters of the decade..
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ElTerribleMorales
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Beanflicker
Totally Disagree with Lennox as HW of the Decade, especially considering he fought only 3 of those years and they were by all accounts years past his prime.
Look at his record: Michael Grant, snoozer agaisnt David Tua, Frans Botha, KO LOSS to Rahman, a 12-years-past-his-prime Mike Tyson and the Vitali fight.
Give it to one of the Klitschkos, who were in their primes during this decade and ruled for much longer.
No disrespect to Lennox, who is one of the greatest HWs to ever grace the ring, but the 2000's weren't his decade.
Who has a better record than that?
Wlad's resume is crap.
Wlad beat up both Botha and Rahman, Tyson was shot, and Tua nor Grant ever won a title, plus he has wins over
Byrd, Peter, Brock, Ibragimov, Chagaev, and Chambers
so who honestly did more from 2000 onward?
Was there any point in naming that lot? Even a "shot" Tyson pisses all over them.
You forgot to mention Lewis beat Vitali.
So that's a prime Rahman, compared to the old sumo Wlad beat, Botha, who Lewis beat far more impressively, an unbeaten prime Grant, a prime still deadly Tua, a Tyson that hadn't lost for five years and a prime hungry Vitali.
Now, alongside Wlad's bunch of D-level wins, he was also destroyed by Corrie 'golfer' Sanders and humiliated against Lamon Brewster.
Quality over quantity. Lewis wins easy. Fact.
Re: Ring Magazine fighters of the decade..
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ElTerribleMorales
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Beanflicker
Totally Disagree with Lennox as HW of the Decade, especially considering he fought only 3 of those years and they were by all accounts years past his prime.
Look at his record: Michael Grant, snoozer agaisnt David Tua, Frans Botha, KO LOSS to Rahman, a 12-years-past-his-prime Mike Tyson and the Vitali fight.
Give it to one of the Klitschkos, who were in their primes during this decade and ruled for much longer.
No disrespect to Lennox, who is one of the greatest HWs to ever grace the ring, but the 2000's weren't his decade.
Who has a better record than that?
Wlad's resume is crap.
Wlad beat up both Botha and Rahman, Tyson was shot, and Tua nor Grant ever won a title, plus he has wins over
Byrd, Peter, Brock, Ibragimov, Chagaev, and Chambers
so who honestly did more from 2000 onward?
Was there any point in naming that lot? Even a "shot" Tyson pisses all over them.
You forgot to mention Lewis beat Vitali.
So that's a prime Rahman, compared to the old sumo Wlad beat, Botha, who Lewis beat far more impressively, an unbeaten prime Grant, a prime still deadly Tua, a Tyson that hadn't lost for five years and a prime hungry Vitali.
Now, alongside Wlad's bunch of D-level wins, he was also destroyed by Corrie 'golfer' Sanders and humiliated against Lamon Brewster.
Quality over quantity. Lewis wins easy. Fact.
Lewis by a country mile and some more. ;)
Re: Ring Magazine fighters of the decade..
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
So that's a prime Rahman, compared to the old sumo Wlad beat, Botha, who Lewis beat far more impressively, an unbeaten prime Grant, a prime still deadly Tua, a Tyson that hadn't lost for five years and a prime hungry Vitali.
You're wasting your talents here, man. You should be a big-time promoter for the way you can spin things.
I actually LOL'd at the "a tyson who hadn't lost in five years" part ;D
Re: Ring Magazine fighters of the decade..
The underrating and underappreciating of the Klitschko's by today's fans should be considered criminal.
You can give the fighter of the decade to the guy who dominated nearly the full decade, or you can give it to the great fighter who was in the twilight of his career, lost to a guy who he shouldn't have lost to in a million years, and finally realized he was way passed his prime and it was time to retire 3 years into the decade.
Yes he beat Vitali, but a cut victory over a guy who came in on 2 weeks notice is hardly something to base a "HW of the decade award on".
Its like saying Joe Louis was the HW of the 50's.
Re: Ring Magazine fighters of the decade..
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ElTerribleMorales
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Beanflicker
Totally Disagree with Lennox as HW of the Decade, especially considering he fought only 3 of those years and they were by all accounts years past his prime.
Look at his record: Michael Grant, snoozer agaisnt David Tua, Frans Botha, KO LOSS to Rahman, a 12-years-past-his-prime Mike Tyson and the Vitali fight.
Give it to one of the Klitschkos, who were in their primes during this decade and ruled for much longer.
No disrespect to Lennox, who is one of the greatest HWs to ever grace the ring, but the 2000's weren't his decade.
Who has a better record than that?
Wlad's resume is crap.
Wlad beat up both Botha and Rahman, Tyson was shot, and Tua nor Grant ever won a title, plus he has wins over
Byrd, Peter, Brock, Ibragimov, Chagaev, and Chambers
so who honestly did more from 2000 onward?
Was there any point in naming that lot? Even a "shot" Tyson pisses all over them.
You forgot to mention Lewis beat Vitali.
So that's a prime Rahman, compared to the old sumo Wlad beat, Botha, who Lewis beat far more impressively, an unbeaten prime Grant, a prime still deadly Tua, a Tyson that hadn't lost for five years and a prime hungry Vitali.
Now, alongside Wlad's bunch of D-level wins, he was also destroyed by Corrie 'golfer' Sanders and humiliated against Lamon Brewster.
Quality over quantity. Lewis wins easy. Fact.
Gotta agree with you here Fenster Lewis is way ahead of the rest at HW. Gotta say RJJ should be LHW too but that might be my biased. Certainly not Tarver though.
Re: Ring Magazine fighters of the decade..
Quote:
Originally Posted by
jdonaher1
Good list but I can't agree with Marquez at Featherweight. He was beaten by Chris John (yes it was close but he still won) and John is undefeated and still a long time champ. Any doubts about him only fighting oversea's don't hold water after seeing him fight twice in the US.
No Chris John didn't win, the 2 points that got took away were a joke. And JMM still won with the points getting took away.
But i agree JMM did move up to Super Featherweight and had some of his best performances, like in the rematch vs Pacquiao, MAB, Juarez.
