you know who we forgot? JMM. I can't believe I left out Marquez.
Printable View
you know who we forgot? JMM. I can't believe I left out Marquez.
Thats the great thing today, we have the records to scrutinize much easier because we lived it, live action. I can look at a record from another era and relate only to whats been observed by others and the few we are fortunate to see but we're still seeing it after the fact and in a broken random order. Rambling here man. Long day.Quote:
Originally Posted by Beanflicker
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spicoli
Yeah, it'll always be hard to compare because they are just completely different worlds.
I do think that the fact that old timer's fought more often gets overblown in terms of importance. While I do agree that it gave guys more experience to perfect their craft... in terms of quality of opponents, these HUGE resumes are padded with stiffs, complete throwaway fights. Ray Robinson won 173 fights, which is a crazy number for sure, but how many of those 173 fights were top-quality opponents? I'd go out on a limb and say it's a very small fraction. Guys had to fight 200 times because they had to, not because they were brave he-men who wanted to. If SRR or Benny Leonard could have made a couple million for one fight, they'd only fight once or twice a year too.
I think the records and numbers can all be very similiar for the most part, kept in perspective with amount fought. All fighters, ALL, have had there fill of cannon fodder and some have more padding than a High School Prom. I mean Leonard though massivly active like many then had the same pace as alot of big names today in regards to a major title. Mosley, Jones jr, Mayweather etc. Almost four, four and a half yrs and they faced some clay pigeons too. Mosley had more cans than a recycling center before his trinket. Today watching a young groomed superstars knock over some guys with the skill of a crash test dummy can be hard to stomach. Guys had to fight very true but it evened out with those considered 'great' over time. Its in large part a generational thing.
Ok well let's make a list of his toughest opponents. I'll just put the guys I know, you can add some if you feel I missed somebody or if I wrongly included someone.Quote:
Originally Posted by greynotsoold
Jake Lamotta
Henry Armstong
Kid Galivan
Bobo Olsen
Randy Turpin
Rocky Graziano
Joey Maxim
Carmen Basilio
Gene Fulmer
There's 9 guys I know are considered great, or at least solid fighters. It's possible I skipped over a name, but his other opponents I know nothing about.
I'll give him credit for 3 Lamotta fights (that's 12), two Gene Fulmer fights (that's 13), two Turpin's fights (14) and two Basilio fights (15). So by my calculations (which could change), I have Robinson fighting 15 legit fights out of 200 total. That's 7.5% of his fights.
That's based on how people judge records now. For instance, I only credited 3 Lamotta fights because nobody would get credit for beating the same guy 5 full times. If Floyd fought and beat Cotto another 4 times, would people care?
That's going on name recognition alone though. I'm not even questioning the quality of the opponents or the timeframe that he fought them in (for example, I think Armstrong was 35 years old and a year or two away from retirement when they fought. He was also a blown up LW fighting a legit big WW in SRR).
Langford fought Wills about 20 times not because he wanted to but because he had to. Burley and the rest of Murderers row fought each other about 10 times each. Not because they wanted to but because they had to. They fought to survive. It does not take away how good they were. Nobody was making 40 million a fight and taking 2 years off in between. Robinson fought these guys more then once because they remained at the top of the food chain and kept getting in line.There was no other belt to be had. I do think tbh that Robinson overlooked the Murderers Row and only fought Wade after he had been retired for two years. I'm sure that money which runs the show today once Robinson was at the top had something to do with it. Of course there are exceptions like two guys not being able to get their ducks in a row for 50 million a piece while the world blames just about everybody else. Fighting people multiple times today wont wash because we live in an instant gratification society. Boxing in many ways resembles a drive through fast food joint. And people change those because somebody forgot to put ketchup in the bag. You lose once today and a certain segment of the boxing viewershipQuote:
Originally Posted by BeanflickerOk well let's make a list of his toughest opponents. I'll just put the guys I know, you can add some if you feel I missed somebody or if I wrongly included someone.Quote:
Originally Posted by greynotsoold
Jake Lamotta
Henry Armstong
Kid Galivan
Bobo Olsen
Randy Turpin
Rocky Graziano
Joey Maxim
Carmen Basilio
Gene Fulmer
There's 9 guys I know are considered great, or at least solid fighters. It's possible I skipped over a name, but his other opponents I know nothing about.
I'll give him credit for 3 Lamotta fights (that's 12), two Gene Fulmer fights (that's 13), two Turpin's fights (14) and two Basilio fights (15). So by my calculations (which could change), I have Robinson fighting 15 legit fights out of 200 total. That's 7.5% of his fights.
That's based on how people judge records now. For instance, I only credited 3 Lamotta fights because nobody would get credit for beating the same guy 5 full times. If Floyd fought and beat Cotto another 4 times, would people care?
throws you to the wolves. Considering the sport, that in and of itself is disturbing. People lost more in past eras because they fought once every two weeks with many receiving the call the night before. That shit was common place. Its why guys that go 128-1-2 with 84 knockouts got noticed. Of course the 85 and 0 as an amateur with over 40 first round knockouts didn't hurt.
Robinson fought 18 world champions and beat 12 hall of famers in an era of 1 champion per division not 10.
You forgot a few...Holly Mims, Aaron Wade, Rocky Castellani, Ralph Dupas, Bobo Olson, Jose Basora, Charlie Fusari, Steve Belloise, Kid Gavilan, Bernard Docusen, Tommy Bell, Sammy Angott, Henry Armstrong, Fritzie Zivic, and Marty Servo.
He fought Izzy Janazzo a whole bunch of times, and Jannazzo had a final record of 63(8 kos)-45 (stopped 6 times, three by Robinson, one in his last fight), which isn't much. Until you look at his record and the quality of guys he was fighting, many of them several times, and losing close fights to and you can tell that he could fight more than a little bit.
Look at Robinson's record and how early on he was fighting guys like Angott and Zivic and Servo and you can see he wasn't ever taking easy fights.
Ok I'll take your word for it and add the 10 extra guys I never mentioned (I have to question how good a 63-45 record fighter is but ok).Quote:
Originally Posted by greynotsoold
Thats 25 legit fights out of 200, which is up to 12.5%.
Lets take a look at a modern great, Floyd Mayweather.
Genaro Hernandez
Angel Manfredy
Diego Corrales
Jesus Chavez
Jose Luis Castillo twice
Arturo Gatti (if Jannazzo is added, surely we can add Gatti)
Sharmba Mitchell (Manny Stewart picked Sharmba to beat Floyd)
Zab Judah
De La Hoya
Ricky Hatton
Juan Manuel Marquez
Shane Mosley
Cotto
Alvarez (coming up)
That's being less than generous, leaving out a host of tough champs he fought like Ortiz, Guerrero, ect. You can tell me if you think any of these guys shouldn't be included. I put Sharmba in there mainly on the basis of Stewart's prediction so he can go.
But as it stands now, that's 33% for Floyd (so roughly 1/3) and 10 less than SRR, which is pretty surprising considering Floyd has less than 1/4th the number of fights that SRR had.
I honestly think there was a lot higher level of competition back in the SRR era than there is now. There were more professional fighters in New York than there are registered in the entire world today and they were literally coming from hunger. No crybabies quitting fights because they got a booboo on their eye or at least nobody anywhere near world level.
Give those old timers modern nutrition and training and you could count the number of modern-day guys who could hang with them without having to take your shoes and socks off.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kirkland Laing
So on one hand, you can attribute a guy's toughness to coming from hunger, and at the same time "give him modern nutrition and training" and he'd be a better fighter? I think a certain measure of both is always neccesary to produce a top fighter in any era, this arguement really doesn't work imo.
Meh I think that's a "rose-colored glasses" view of it if I ever heard one.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kirkland Laing
I don't buy the thought that they were so much tougher back then, either. There are cowards and warriors from every generation. A few weeks ago I watched Dennis Lebedev plod forward with the most fucked up facial injuries I've ever seen in a boxing ring.
A warrior's heart is something you're born with, and there are still tons of boxers today who came from absolutely nothing with the hunger to make something of themselves.
We hear all this hyperbole about the old school guys, but when you put that aside and actually watch a guy like Bobo Olsen, Gene Fullmer, Carmen Basilio... they were nothing special. These guys weren't the omnipotent demigods that boxing "experts" would have us believe. It's all about context.
And Robinson quit against Maxim. I know people will say "ohh it was hot" "oh he had to carry Maxim's weight". That's true. But he was still conscious, he could still get up, he chose not to.
These guys are still human after all!
The ref could not finish the fight, that is how how it was dipstick.Quote:
Originally Posted by Beanflicker
You're just being a f*<kin' idiot with this bull$#!t here. I try to stay away from being rude, but when someone makes an idiotic statement like this, ya can't sugar-coat it...Quote:
And Robinson quit against Maxim. I know people will say "ohh it was hot" "oh he had to carry Maxim's weight". That's true. But he was still conscious, he could still get up, he chose not to.
These guys are still human after all!
So....back to the question at hand.
JMM vs Armstrong
Benny vs Duran
Mosley vs Sweet Pete
Ike Williams vs Mayweather
Advance it from there gentlemen!
Why is that idiotic? He quit, didn't he?Quote:
Originally Posted by bradlee180
And so what if the fat, middle-aged ref couldn't finish the fight? That's supposed to mean something? I get it was hot, but he quit. There's no getting around it.
I'm not saying SRR was a sissy, I'm just saying he was human just like any other fighter.
My point is that we'll go out of our way to justify why an old timer showed a bit of weakness and quit, but we'll bury a modern guy in a second if he shows the same weakness and go on about how "back in the day, fighters didn't quit".
Roberto Duran quit worse than anyone I've ever seen, and you'll still get people trying to justify it.
It's hard to believe, but far too common it seems: Too many people attempt to comment on a fight without actually having seen it...
Who did that? If you're referring to me, please tell me what I'm missing, because I have indeed seen the fight.Quote:
Originally Posted by bradlee180
Mosley always did load up on his punches. But at Lightweight he had the hand speed to get away with it. I think Mosley would take it on pointsQuote:
Originally Posted by El KabongYeah nothing against Shane, but his style would be something that played to Whittaker's best attributes. I think the more you load up on punches then the more you play into Whittaker's hands.Quote:
Originally Posted by BeanflickerAgreed! I think Mosley was an ATG lightweight, but I don't fancy his chances against Whitaker!Quote:
Originally Posted by El Kabong
Whitaker wins a decision, underrated toughness and his pure boxing ability helps him win in a close but clear decision. Duran was a tough SOB but he could be outboxed and I think Whitaker would have just enough pop at LW to allow him to box Duran over 15. Now that being said I wouldn't be suprised if Whitaker gets dropped 1 or 2 times late to lose a close decision or even get tko'd but at 135 I just don't see that happening. Pernell is the man @135 IMO
A little fence sitting but that's how I see it. I can also see most of them going the other way. As crazy as it sounds I'm more sure about Williams beating Floyd @135 then I am on the outcome of the others.Quote:
Originally Posted by DavilaJones
Agreed and nice av.Quote:
Originally Posted by chinchekked
At LW, Duran never boxed anyone close to Pernell.
JMM vs Armstrong – Armstrong points being busier and not giving Marquez the time or space to counter.
Benny vs Duran – Duran catches up with Benny and over powers him to a decision.
Mosley vs Sweet Pete – Sweet pea outpointing Shane comfortably in most part.
Ike Williams vs Mayweather – Williams is a tough hard and entertaining fight.
One of the most intriguing, theoretical match ups in any division in history for me!!
Gun to the head I pick Duran, but he wouldn't have liked having the piss taken out him a la Leonard II, so who knows!
As for myself regarding these hypthetical matchups I would have to say:
*]JMM over armstrong because if an older JMM could eventually breakdown Diaz over 8 rounds a fresher marquez could do it equally to Armstrong.
* Duran would beat benny because infighters with boxing skill are the damn nightmare of pure boxers.
*Ugh...See I honestly think Mosley is perhaps the hardest hitting lightweight, he KO'd people at 154, so his power carried from 135 to 154 and thats a big jump too. Sweet Pea had beed KD'd before but never really hurt and damn damn damn I hate picking a winner in this one but gun to my head and knife to my balls I would pick Shane due to his sheer blinding handspeed, pop and tenacity at 135.
* I'd pick Mayweather over Ike ala Chico Corrales.
As for the losers bracket:
Armstrong vs Sweet Pete Hammering Hank is gonna eat that right handed jab all night long.
Ike vs Benny I dont see Ike landing that right enough to win the fight.
Armstrong beats Marquez. At 135 Armstrong was still young, if not at his peak then almost there, while, at that weight, Marquez had slowed a bit. It would be a good fight, but Armstrong knows how to bring pressure and maintain it. A guy like Diaz just comes and throws punches, but because he gets his weight up on his left foot, he doesn't punch too hard and he eats uppercuts. Armstrong didn't do it that way. Wide UD with late round domination by Armstrong, or he stops Marquez late.
Ike Williams was a really really good fighter and he could do it all. Box real good, every punch in the book, fight inside or outside. He's going to beat Mayweather.
Mosley was something at LW; he fought like an old time fighter. By that I mean, he didn't slip and then punch, or bob/weave, then punch. He punched on the move, and you don't see that any more. He was fast and hit hard, and it wouldn't suprise me if he stopped Whitaker.
Benny Leonard vs Duran should probably be the finals (unless Armstrong or Williams beat Duran). Leonard hit hard, but not as hard as Duran, and he was faster, better defensively, and he was smarter than Duran, especially Duran at LW. (Not that Duran was stupid, he just got smarter later) Leonard could hold his own inside, too. After all, he was 5'5", so it isn't like he was an outside fighter. He moved back and forth realk well.
JMM doesn't need guys to give him time and space, he makes it pretty well IMOQuote:
Originally Posted by Master
Armstrong was perpetual motion when he got started and did not stop until the last bell. He would be too much for JMM.Quote:
Originally Posted by BeanflickerJMM doesn't need guys to give him time and space, he makes it pretty well IMOQuote:
Originally Posted by Master
Quote:
Originally Posted by Master
Yeah right. He did that well against guys who would stand in front of him. A counter puncher of JMM's skill would eat him up throwing those wild shots.
Hank wasn't a big puncher either, he was a "wear you down" guy, and he wouldn't land that consistently on JMM without taking some big bombs in return.
If a prime Manny Pacquiao isn'tperpetual motion, I don'tknowwhat is!Quote:
Originally Posted by MasterArmstrong was perpetual motion when he got started and did not stop until the last bell. He would be too much for JMM.Quote:
Originally Posted by BeanflickerJMM doesn't need guys to give him time and space, he makes it pretty well IMOQuote:
Originally Posted by Master
Also, I personallythink JCC lost the fight to Pernell through fatigue, even though he wasn'texactlymissing with a great deal of shots. I think Duran puts a bit of a beating on Pernell in spots en route to a close UD.
Lol pardon me;DQuote:
Originally Posted by Beanflicker
Hank scored 27 straight ko's from 1937 to 1938 getting the featherweight title in the process. Not only is that fight total in one year almost a ten year career today but they were all knockouts. Prior to loosing his lightweight title in a rematch with Ambers he was on a winning streak of 46 and 0 with 39 knockouts.
NOTE to @Jimanuel Boogustus. After Hanks death it was found that he had an abnormally sized heart. By some reports almost twice the size of what was considered normal and not caused by disease. Scientists have concluded that suck a ticker was responsible for the horrendous pace he set in his fights.
Sure Manny was relentless but he's not even on the same page.
Yes Armstrong had a very slow heart beat which meant once he was warmed up he could fight forever. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by IamInuitLol pardon me;DQuote:
Originally Posted by Beanflicker
Hank scored 27 straight ko's from 1937 to 1938 getting the featherweight title in the process. Not only is that fight total in one year almost a ten year career today but they were all knockouts. Prior to loosing his lightweight title in a rematch with Ambers he was on a winning streak of 46 and 0 with 39 knockouts.
NOTE to @Jimanuel Boogustus. After Hanks death it was found that he had an abnormally sized heart. By some reports almost twice the size of what was considered normal and not caused by disease. Scientists have concluded that suck a ticker was responsible for the horrendous pace he set in his fights.
Sure Manny was relentless but he's not even on the same page.
Process of elimination: First, there's no way in hell Whitaker knocks Duran out. So scratch those options. I consider that Duran's best weight was LW. He was an awesome force, with constant pressure and an amazing work output. Whitaker could hang with him for awhile, and likely use his own awesome defensive skills to avoid a lot of flush punches. He'd surely outbox Duran through some stretches. But I don't see any other outcome but a Duran win by decision, or a late TKO. He beat SRL.... he would beat Sweat Pea.
*Duran was all action, never got tired,, this is not even a good question. U tell me how Pernell was gunna hit Duran without getting smashed? if Duran doesn't ko him, he beats him badly on the cards... Whitaker was all defence, little offence... c'mon... Duran beat Ray Leonard in his prime...Quote:
Originally Posted by fan johnnyCouldn't have said it better.Quote:
Originally Posted by bradlee180
Whitaker was more than just defence, his body work was exceptional and it did cause knockdowns late in fights.
So Duran fought 40 times from 1972 -1978 as Lightweight Champion of the world with a 39-1 record in that time and all of them were slobs? Boxing must've been in a recession in the 70's?Quote:
Originally Posted by Beanflicker
Beanflicker you must be deliberately being a pain because have you seen some of his fights at lightweight. Duran was a wrecking machine, he beat Ken Buchanan and Esteban De Jesus and they were brilliant fighters. They would easily be champions now if they were fighting today.Quote:
Originally Posted by THE THIRD MANSo Duran fought 40 times from 1972 -1978 as Lightweight Champion of the world with a 39-1 record in that time and all of them were slobs? Boxing must've been in a recession in the 70's?Quote:
Originally Posted by Beanflicker
So what? Doesn't mean he was a big puncher. He wore guys down with his insane pace. It was about pressure. Given enough time to exert pressure, water wears down rock. A great KO percentage doesn't necessarily = big puncher.Quote:
Originally Posted by IamInuit
He was like an old time Aaron Pryor as far as I can see (another guy who wasn't a big one-punch guy but had a great KO%). Just wore dudes down.
Ken Buchanan, Esteban De Jesus.... and... who else?Quote:
Originally Posted by Master
And who did Esteban beat (besides Duran) that makes him so great? Cervantes beat the holy shit out of him.
Ken Buchanan, ok, he's a guy who's best known for getting eaten alive by a young Duran. Why was he so great?
And for everyone who thinks Duran KO's Pernell... I want to strangle you for underrating a true ring legend like Pernell so badly. That's absolute insanity.