What do you believe to be the greatest title run from a pro post WW2 (a world title), without losing the titles or moving up or down a divison. What do you believe to be more important quantity or quality?
Printable View
What do you believe to be the greatest title run from a pro post WW2 (a world title), without losing the titles or moving up or down a divison. What do you believe to be more important quantity or quality?
i'm not sure who has the most impressive title runs but quantity is better than quality in my opinion. If boxers stayed in there own weight class and tried to defend there titles people wouldn't be able to say you ducked anyone.
Totally misread your post there so if my post (before this edit) is quoted ignore.Quote:
Originally Posted by terrorsid
I think Hagler's title run has to be up there as one of the greats. He has both quality and quantity within his opposition.
Bhop had 1 helluva title run
You ask a lot of questions mate and I for one am learning things myself from the responses so keep it up!Quote:
Originally Posted by Motor City Cobra
Gaining weight but not getting taller while challenging warriors in their strong holds is not an easy thing to do.
Hagler at middleweight
Hopkins at middleweight
Jones Jr. at lightheavyweight
Trinidad at welterweight, was IBF welterweight champion from 1993 to 2000, with wins over Blocker, Carr, Whitaker, Camacho, Campas, Pineda, and DLH
Roberto Duran at lightweight. He would only lose once during his lightweight reign, and that was to Esteban DeJesus in a non title bout. He would beat him in a rematch and a rubber match in defence of his title. He had 40+ fights as a lightweight, and never lost a title fight at that weight.
Arguably, had South Korean Jung Koo Chang (38-4) fought in the U.S. during his reign, his popularity would had rivaled that of Aaron Pryor from whom he took his nickname. He went 37-1 in his first 38 outings. In 1983, he avenged his first loss by icing Hilario Zapata and capturing the WBC light flyweight crown.
Amazingly, “The Hawk” then established what would then be a world record for the most defenses as World Light Flyweight champion, defending the title successfully 16 times between 1983 and 1988.Chang's record for successive title defenses in the 108 pound division would fall to Myung Woo Yuh who successfully defended his WBA Jr. Flyweight Title 17 times in his first reign between 1985 and 1991.
I always give WBA Featherweight champ Eusebio Pedroza props whenever I can.
He had eighteen title defenses over 7 years before finally falling to Barry McGuigan. Too bad he never fought Salvador Sanchez. Sanchez gets more recognition, but I think Pedroza's record gives up little or nothing to Sanchez.
Most exciting boxers didnt stay at one division. Alot of the boxers that had long runs in one division were not fan friendly, ie were safe, defensive minded and boring as hell. My all time top title run was Mike Tyson.
Nice one.Chang was one of the bravest and all out fierce fighters Ive ever seen fight.He stepped out on his own terms originally.Thought he beat Chitalada and literally came within one finishing shot in the last seconds of claiming another strap vs. a battered Kittakasem.Awesome fight,classicQuote:
Originally Posted by holmcall
Khaosai Galaxy 49-1-43 with 18 title defenses at superfly weight.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jon09
Good one indeed!!
LIGHT FLYWEIGHT.
Myung woo Yuh made 17 defences in the same division as Jung Koo Chang , they were champions at the same time but never fought.He lost his first fight to Hiroki Ioka on a split verdict , won the return , then defended the title 1 more time before retiring - 38 wins - 1 loss ( avenged ) 14 ko's.
Always wanted him to fight Chang. He was a great little fighter.
And here was I thinking you were going to pick Joe Calzaghe :p.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dark Lord Al
WHO ? ;DQuote:
Originally Posted by CFHAnd here was I thinking you were going to pick Joe Calzaghe :p.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dark Lord Al
calzaghe...
If you want quantity then Ricardo Lopez had nearly 30 defences of his title without a loss. I can't remember how long he went defending one of his world titles but it was 20 something.
Carlos Monzon the great middleweight who was WBC champ from 1970-1974 (he was stripped of it) and was WBA champ from 1970-1977. Basically a champ for 7 years. He had 14 title defenses.
Would have love to see a prime Monzon squared off against Hagler.
Sahme on anybody who say Hopkins, when quality of opposition was clearly defined as a reason for your answer ;D If B-Hop gets a mention so does Sven Ottke ;)
The ones that spring to mind have been mentioned - Galaxy, Duran & Lopez
Didn't SRR go about 70-0 between the end of WW2 and the Turpin fight?
One of the fights I would most like to have seen in history ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by generalbulldog
Well I think he lost his 41st fight to Lamotta then by the time he fought turpin he was 128-1-2 so it must have been 90 fights unbeaten after the Lamotta fight. Taking nothin away from SRR though most were not title bouts as he seemed to fight every other week. Could you imagine how unbreakable his record would be for defenses had all been title fights?Quote:
Originally Posted by BIG H
Not to compare Hopkins with the almighty Duran or anything, but I don't think that Hopkins' quality of opposition at middleweight was any worse than Duran's at lightweight.Quote:
Originally Posted by BIG H
When I wrote Duran, I knew somebody would make that comparison and you have a point ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by CGMNot to compare Hopkins with the almighty Duran or anything, but I don't think that Hopkins' quality of opposition at middleweight was any worse than Duran's at lightweight.Quote:
Originally Posted by BIG H
The thing is with both Hopkins and Duran I am convinced that even if they had''ve faced tougher opposition the result would've been the same as they are both awesome.
hopkins at 160
calzaghe at 168
jones at 168
morales at 126
:confused: Then what was your point? I know how you feel about Duran, but did you mean what you said about Hopkins level of opposition or not?Quote:
Originally Posted by BIG HWhen I wrote Duran, I knew somebody would make that comparison and you have a point ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by CGMNot to compare Hopkins with the almighty Duran or anything, but I don't think that Hopkins' quality of opposition at middleweight was any worse than Duran's at lightweight.Quote:
Originally Posted by BIG H
The thing is with both Hopkins and Duran I am convinced that even if they had''ve faced tougher opposition the result would've been the same as they are both awesome.
Something has to be said about the ones that make a long run in the same division.Especially now when guys jump weight classes as eaily as skipping rope.Hopkins cleaned out his division though it was not stacked with huge names,he caped the tournamant.Unlike a Lopez he was still able/willing to move up with success while Lopez watched some a dream fight with Carbajal go by the wayside.
Orlando Canizales had a great run at Bantam
Yes!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by CGM:confused: Then what was your point? I know how you feel about Duran, but did you mean what you said about Hopkins level of opposition or not?Quote:
Originally Posted by BIG HWhen I wrote Duran, I knew somebody would make that comparison and you have a point ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by CGM
The thing is with both Hopkins and Duran I am convinced that even if they had''ve faced tougher opposition the result would've been the same as they are both awesome.
Read the second part of that post Brain of the outfit ;)
Both had questionable opposition, so if you are talking about quality of opponents on paper and using that as your only criteria then you could day the reigns aren't that impressive - but what I said was I believe those 2 guys would still have reigned for as long regardless of the opposition.
I don't judge Hopkins or Duran or what I see on Box Rec I judge them on what I have seen with my own eyes, but that's a different question to who has the most impressive opposition in their reign
:rolleyes: And I knew when I mentioned Duran that you would make that comparison.Quote:
Originally Posted by BIG HYes!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by CGM:confused: Then what was your point? I know how you feel about Duran, but did you mean what you said about Hopkins level of opposition or not?Quote:
Originally Posted by BIG H
Read the second part of that post Brain of the outfit ;)
Both had questionable opposition, so if you are talking about quality of opponents on paper and using that as your only criteria then you could day the reigns aren't that impressive - but what I said was I believe those 2 guys would still have reigned for as long regardless of the opposition.
I don't judge Hopkins or Duran or what I see on Box Rec I judge them on what I have seen with my own eyes, but that's a different question to who has the most impressive opposition in their reign
Have you actually got a point then?Quote:
Originally Posted by CGM:rolleyes: And I knew when I mentioned Duran that you would make that comparison.Quote:
Originally Posted by BIG HYes!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by CGM
Read the second part of that post Brain of the outfit ;)
Both had questionable opposition, so if you are talking about quality of opponents on paper and using that as your only criteria then you could day the reigns aren't that impressive - but what I said was I believe those 2 guys would still have reigned for as long regardless of the opposition.
I don't judge Hopkins or Duran or what I see on Box Rec I judge them on what I have seen with my own eyes, but that's a different question to who has the most impressive opposition in their reign
Yeah, I thought i spelled it out in my first post. To me your post implied an unfavorable comparison between Duran and Hopkins based on quality of opposition at middleweight vs lightweight. And I made counterpoint to that. And since I disagreed with you on something about Duran, I'm not at all surprised the debate turned into something about being a discerning boxing fan vs. being a "boxrec drone", cause it ain't the first time I've seen that comparison under similar circumstances.Quote:
Originally Posted by BIG HHave you actually got a point then?Quote:
Originally Posted by CGM:rolleyes: And I knew when I mentioned Duran that you would make that comparison.Quote:
Originally Posted by BIG H
Big and small
Larry Holmes Heavyweight 20 title defenses
Pongsaklek Wonjongkam Flyweight 17 title defenses
Ratanapol Sol Voraphin Strawweight 18 defenses
"The Brown Bomber" Joe Louis was heavyweight champion of the world over 11 years, from 1937 to 1949. He defended the world heavyweight crown for over 26 highly impressive times with 22 wins coming by way of KO.
:foruml10gc5:
"The Brown Bomber" Joe Louis was heavyweight champion of the world over 11 years, from 1937 to 1949. He defended the world heavyweight crown for over 26 highly impressive times with 22 wins coming by way of KO.
:foruml10gc5:
And I said that you had a good point! But you have to keep gabbing on and putting your rolling eyes and confused smilies up when I was actually acknowledging what you said!Quote:
Originally Posted by CGMYeah, I thought i spelled it out in my first post. To me your post implied an unfavorable comparison between Duran and Hopkins based on quality of opposition at middleweight vs lightweight.Quote:
Originally Posted by BIG HHave you actually got a point then?Quote:
Originally Posted by CGM
"The Brown Bomber" Joe Louis was heavyweight champion of the world over 11 years, from 1937 to 1949 ! And defended the world heavyweight crown 26 times
Think Larry Holmes had one heck of a run and would of broke a record if he did not get cheated in his fight with Spinks still a good run though.
Larry Holmes is one of my favorites but i think there 1st fight, was close enough to go either way. The rematch on the other hand is a different story.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr140