-
10 Most Accomplished of My Lifetime
This is going to be nearly impossible. But I guess that's the fun. Here are the rules. Anyone who had a significant chunk of there career from 1970 on counts (1970 was when I remember watching my first fight, Ali-Quarry). Here is the criteria I'm basing things on
1. Great fighters defeated (preference for them being in their prime and at their best weight)
2. Dominance in multiple divisions, taking on all comers
2. Dominance in a division, taking on all comers
4. THE MAN championships
5. Other extraordinary accomplishments
6. Extraordinary displays of fighting spirit (hey, it's my damned list!)
---------------------------------------------
1. Muhammad Ali-Defeated the greatest heavyweight roster in history. Liston, Frazier, Foreman, Patterson, Norton, Folley, Bonavena, Lyle and Shavers. First three time lineal heavyweight champion. 19 defenses. The first big, highly mobile heavyweight.
2. Roberto Duran-Defeated Ernest Marcel, Ken Buchanan, Esteban DeJesus, Carlos Palomino, Ray Leonard, Pipino Cuevas and then as an old man Davey Moore and Iran Barkley. 12 defenses of lightweight crown. Defeated atop three all-time 147 in his prime to become undisputed king there too and fought a top five all-time middle to a standstill. Arguably had two HOF careers, before and after No Mas.
3. Ray Leonard-Defeated Tommy Hearns, Wilfredo Benitez, Roberto Duran and Marvin Hagler. That's as good a top four as maybe anyone in history. His durability and overall activity levels keep him from being higher. A true great.
4. Pernell Whittaker-THE MAN at both 135 and 147 with a total of 18 defenses. Schooled Azumah Nelson and Julio Cesar Chavez. One of history's great defenders.
5. Ruben Olivares-THE MAN at 118 and 126. He ruled the greatest bantamweight era in history defeating Castillo, Medel, Burruni, Rose, Pimintel and then went to 126 and knocked off Chacon (twice). The finest bodypuncher I've ever seen.
6. Julio Cesar Chavez-THE MAN at 135 and 140, defeated Meldrick Taylor, Edwin Rosario, Hector Camacho, Juan LaPorte and Ruben Castillo. 16 defenses.
7. Carlos Monzon-THE MAN at 160 for seven years and 13 defenses. Beat HOFers Benvenuti (twice), Griffith (twice) and Napoles as well as Rodrigo Valdez. Closed his career with a 13 year, 70+ fight unbeaten run.
8. George Foreman-Really hard to rank. He destroyed Joe Frazier twice and Kenny Norton and had a slugfest with Ron Lyle. He's here for a simple reason. He did the impossible. He won the heavyweight crown 21 years apart.
9. Marvin Hagler-Dominated 160 like perhaps no one in history. Won every one of twelve defenses by KO except Duran. Defeated Briscoe, Watts, Antuofuermo, Duran, Hearns and Mugabi.
10. Manny Pacquiao-First man ever to win four lineal championships. One of the few in history to excel across five of the original divisions. Not higher because many of his biggest wins were against men no longer at their best weight or in their primes. Could well move higher.
It Kills me, KILLS ME, that Ricardo Lopez, Alexis Arguello, Jose Napoles, Mike Spinks, Evander Holyfield, Roy Jones, Chiquita Gonzales, Wilfredo Benitez, Khaosai Galaxy, Tito Trinidad, Azumah Nelson, Salvador Sanchez, Carlos Zarate, Erik Morales, Tommy Hearns, Eusabio Pedroza, The Bodysnatcher, James Toney, BHOP and Rafael Marquez aren't on this list. But I only had ten slots!
Who did I leave out and where am I wrong?
-
Re: 10 Most Accomplished of My Lifetime
You better remove Pacquiao from your list, the hounds will be unleashed against you.;);D
-
Re: 10 Most Accomplished of My Lifetime
Don't expect a fast answer. I will have to give this some thought. The first fight I watched live was Ali/Chuvalo in 66 lol. In addition the hockey playoffs are on.
-
Re: 10 Most Accomplished of My Lifetime
Quote:
Originally Posted by
generalbulldog
You better remove Pacquiao from your list, the hounds will be unleashed against you.;);D
To be fair after about the first five slots I could make good arguments for maybe a dozen guys to take the last five. This kida stuff is impossible.
-
Re: 10 Most Accomplished of My Lifetime
Quote:
Originally Posted by
IamInuit
Don't expect a fast answer. I will have to give this some thought. The first fight I watched live was Ali/Chuvalo in 66 lol. In addition the hockey playoffs are on.
Damn. You're OLD!
-
Re: 10 Most Accomplished of My Lifetime
I got to say i like this new guy, he's very enthusiastic. As for your topic i have no idea but great topic, and my favourite on your list is Pernell Whitaker ;)
-
Re: 10 Most Accomplished of My Lifetime
Quote:
Originally Posted by
marbleheadmaui
Quote:
Originally Posted by
IamInuit
Don't expect a fast answer. I will have to give this some thought. The first fight I watched live was Ali/Chuvalo in 66 lol. In addition the hockey playoffs are on.
Damn. You're OLD!
you're not one to speak my friend. You aren't exactly young.
I think Chavez has to be lower. Monson and Hagler are too low. As a sweetpea fan I can't have him below Ray Leonard. He is by far the best defender of your (and my since I'm younger than you) lifetime.
Though Floyd Mayweather Jr. shouldn't be on the list or mentioned among your honorable mentions, many boxing fans and writers would mention him at least among the honorable mentions (though I hate that SOB).
-
Re: 10 Most Accomplished of My Lifetime
Quote:
Originally Posted by
marbleheadmaui
Quote:
Originally Posted by
IamInuit
Don't expect a fast answer. I will have to give this some thought. The first fight I watched live was Ali/Chuvalo in 66 lol. In addition the hockey playoffs are on.
Damn. You're OLD!
Perhaps. Perhaps you were 20 when you watched Ali/Quarry lol which would make me quite young.
-
Re: 10 Most Accomplished of My Lifetime
Interesting thread...
Ali- He is Ali what else is there to say, 1st 3 time LEGIT HW champion, beat more HW legends then any other 2 hwts combined...reinvented himself more then once...Again he is Ali his accomplishments speak for themselves
Mike Tyson- Like Ali an easy answer is He's Mike Tyson and that should be good enough. His best days had questionable comp but man did he walk through guys, Until his decline he dominated like no other HW...His over all attraction to the sport...Youngest HW champion, some of the largest live gates ever, one of if not the biggest PPV attraction of all time...remember PPV was just getting off the ground when Tyson was selling more then most of todays guys...He always kept you wanting more!!! Not many fighters have that ability despite what they can do in the ring
Roy Jones Jr- Middleweight, Super Middleweight, Light Heavyweight and HW champion, had skill we had never seen ina fighter, his athletic ability at MW and SMW were nothing short of jaw dropping, he DOMINATED his weight classes for years..5 or 6 time time world champion
Oscar De La Hoya- six division world champion, maybe the most popular fighter since Ali in terms of fanbase and drawing ability, fought the best competiton available he sought them out!!! Faced JCC, Pernell, Hopkins, PBF, Mosley, Trinidad, Quartey, Pacquiao.Vargas, Campas, Gatti, JJL, Paez, Ruelas, Hernandez,Camacho and the list goes on...Plus went on to be one of the most successful promoters ever....DLH wins even when he loses because he doesnt lose fans and uses the bout to further boxing one way or another
Sugar Ray Leonard- WW, JMW, MW, SMW and LHW world champion, fought Hagler, Hearns, Duran, Benitez, was not until after some wars and eye injuries did he ever look ordinary, popular top resume champion 5 weight classes three of the most memorible rivalries ever.....
-
Re: 10 Most Accomplished of My Lifetime
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ICB
I got to say i like this new guy, he's very enthusiastic. As for your topic i have no idea but great topic, and my favourite on your list is Pernell Whitaker ;)
I agree! I like people who are unbiased and can stick to the topic while also posting quality replies. Great addition here at saddo.
-
Re: 10 Most Accomplished of My Lifetime
Quote:
Originally Posted by
marbleheadmaui
This is going to be nearly impossible. But I guess that's the fun. Here are the rules. Anyone who had a significant chunk of there career from 1970 on counts (1970 was when I remember watching my first fight, Ali-Quarry). Here is the criteria I'm basing things on
1. Great fighters defeated (preference for them being in their prime and at their best weight)
2. Dominance in multiple divisions, taking on all comers
2. Dominance in a division, taking on all comers
4. THE MAN championships
5. Other extraordinary accomplishments
6. Extraordinary displays of fighting spirit (hey, it's my damned list!)
---------------------------------------------
1. Muhammad Ali-Defeated the greatest heavyweight roster in history. Liston, Frazier, Foreman, Patterson, Norton, Folley, Bonavena, Lyle and Shavers. First three time lineal heavyweight champion. 19 defenses. The first big, highly mobile heavyweight.
2. Roberto Duran-Defeated Ernest Marcel, Ken Buchanan, Esteban DeJesus, Carlos Palomino, Ray Leonard, Pipino Cuevas and then as an old man Davey Moore and Iran Barkley. 12 defenses of lightweight crown. Defeated atop three all-time 147 in his prime to become undisputed king there too and fought a top five all-time middle to a standstill. Arguably had two HOF careers, before and after No Mas.
3. Ray Leonard-Defeated Tommy Hearns, Wilfredo Benitez, Roberto Duran and Marvin Hagler. That's as good a top four as maybe anyone in history. His durability and overall activity levels keep him from being higher. A true great.
4. Pernell Whittaker-THE MAN at both 135 and 147 with a total of 18 defenses. Schooled Azumah Nelson and Julio Cesar Chavez. One of history's great defenders.
5. Ruben Olivares-THE MAN at 118 and 126. He ruled the greatest bantamweight era in history defeating Castillo, Medel, Burruni, Rose, Pimintel and then went to 126 and knocked off Chacon (twice). The finest bodypuncher I've ever seen.
6. Julio Cesar Chavez-THE MAN at 135 and 140, defeated Meldrick Taylor, Edwin Rosario, Hector Camacho, Juan LaPorte and Ruben Castillo. 16 defenses.
7. Carlos Monzon-THE MAN at 160 for seven years and 13 defenses. Beat HOFers Benvenuti (twice), Griffith (twice) and Napoles as well as Rodrigo Valdez. Closed his career with a 13 year, 70+ fight unbeaten run.
8. George Foreman-Really hard to rank. He destroyed Joe Frazier twice and Kenny Norton and had a slugfest with Ron Lyle. He's here for a simple reason. He did the impossible. He won the heavyweight crown 21 years apart.
9. Marvin Hagler-Dominated 160 like perhaps no one in history. Won every one of twelve defenses by KO except Duran. Defeated Briscoe, Watts, Antuofuermo, Duran, Hearns and Mugabi.
10. Manny Pacquiao-First man ever to win four lineal championships. One of the few in history to excel across five of the original divisions. Not higher because many of his biggest wins were against men no longer at their best weight or in their primes. Could well move higher.
It Kills me, KILLS ME, that Ricardo Lopez, Alexis Arguello, Jose Napoles, Mike Spinks, Evander Holyfield, Roy Jones, Chiquita Gonzales, Wilfredo Benitez, Khaosai Galaxy, Tito Trinidad, Azumah Nelson, Salvador Sanchez, Carlos Zarate, Erik Morales, Tommy Hearns, Eusabio Pedroza, The Bodysnatcher, James Toney, BHOP and Rafael Marquez aren't on this list. But I only had ten slots!
Who did I leave out and where am I wrong?
I would remove Foreman and Pacquiao and replace them with Lopez and Arguello. Foreman did the impossible when he beat Moorer. But after that he pretty much hand picked his opponents. He actually splintered the titles when he refused to give Axel Shultz a rematch and forced the IBF to strip him. Shultz deserved his rematch. Pacquiao has made his name by beating great, past there prime/shot fighters. Lets be real here. Out of all the big names Pac beat, really only one can be consider to be in his prime. That was the first Barrera fight. And even than Marco came in with already 60 career fights on him
-
Re: 10 Most Accomplished of My Lifetime
Pernell Whitaker- This guy was slick as hell in the ring...I wish he was prime today a bout against Mayweather would be a boxing fans dream in terms of tecnique...was a world champion in one form or another for almost a decade....one of the greatest boxers of all time who until his later years when he stopped training as hard as he partied he was unbeatable
Roberto Duran- Over 100 career wins, was champion in 4 weight classes, had some of the most memorable fights win or lose of the last 40 years, tough as nails and overtime we thought he was done at an elite level he came back to prove the world wrong...The announcement of his name gave fans goosebumps because they knew they were in for a war...Was one of the most intimidating fighters of all time as well
Floyd Mayweather JR- Love him or hate him you can not deny his skill set and the fact he has claimed world titles in 5 weight classes, one of the most defensively skilled fighters ever. Can be exciting if he chooses but no matter what he gives us some sort of clinic against elite opponents one of the era biggest draws recently long time pound for pound best one of the ATG's and most successful fighters period let alone of my time
Manny Pacquiao- Again Love him or hate him the man holds titles in 8 different weight classes, has fought and beaten some of our eras biggest legends...only legitimate loss in his career is against Morales (You cant count losses at 15,16 yrs old in bouts against grown men) Only truly tested against JMM...Made himself a legend by battering bigger men.....An international celebertiy that just adds attention to the sport...pound for pound kingpin like Floyd one of the most successful fighters ever not just of my generation
-
Re: 10 Most Accomplished of My Lifetime
Quote:
Originally Posted by
DaxxKahn
Pernell Whitaker- This guy was slick as hell in the ring...I wish he was prime today a bout against Mayweather would be a boxing fans dream in terms of tecnique...was a world champion in one form or another for almost a decade....one of the greatest boxers of all time who until his later years when he stopped training as hard as he partied he was unbeatable
Roberto Duran- Over 100 career wins, was champion in 4 weight classes, had some of the most memorable fights win or lose of the last 40 years, tough as nails and overtime we thought he was done at an elite level he came back to prove the world wrong...The announcement of his name gave fans goosebumps because they knew they were in for a war...Was one of the most intimidating fighters of all time as well
Floyd Mayweather JR- Love him or hate him you can not deny his skill set and the fact he has claimed world titles in 5 weight classes, one of the most defensively skilled fighters ever. Can be exciting if he chooses but no matter what he gives us some sort of clinic against elite opponents one of the era biggest draws recently long time pound for pound best one of the ATG's and most successful fighters period let alone of my time
Manny Pacquiao- Again Love him or hate him the man holds titles in 8 different weight classes, has fought and beaten some of our eras biggest legends...only legitimate loss in his career is against Morales (You cant count losses at 15,16 yrs old in bouts against grown men) Only truly tested against JMM...Made himself a legend by battering bigger men.....An international celebertiy that just adds attention to the sport...pound for pound kingpin like Floyd one of the most successful fighters ever not just of my generation
Of course you can't count those losses. Mainly cuz he wasn't even fighting at that age. His early losses were at 19 (to a 23 year old) and 21 years old (against a fellow 21 year old). I don't why people always trying to exaggerate shit. He's obviously improved as a fighter. But the losses count
-
Re: 10 Most Accomplished of My Lifetime
Quote:
Originally Posted by
captainanddew
Quote:
Originally Posted by
marbleheadmaui
Quote:
Originally Posted by
IamInuit
Don't expect a fast answer. I will have to give this some thought. The first fight I watched live was Ali/Chuvalo in 66 lol. In addition the hockey playoffs are on.
Damn. You're OLD!
you're not one to speak my friend. You
aren't exactly young.
I think Chavez has to be lower. Monson and Hagler are too low. As a sweetpea fan I can't have him below Ray Leonard. He is by far the best defender of your (and my since I'm younger than you) lifetime.
Though Floyd Mayweather Jr. shouldn't be on the list or mentioned among your honorable mentions, many boxing fans and writers would mention him at least among the honorable mentions (though I hate that SOB).
Hey! Hey! Yup, I probably shoulda mentioned Floyd. As for the others, as much as I love Pete? I'm not sure he ever beat anyone as good as the top four Leonard beat...unless you want to count the Chavez draw/win :)
-
Re: 10 Most Accomplished of My Lifetime
Quote:
Originally Posted by
IamInuit
Quote:
Originally Posted by
marbleheadmaui
Quote:
Originally Posted by
IamInuit
Don't expect a fast answer. I will have to give this some thought. The first fight I watched live was Ali/Chuvalo in 66 lol. In addition the hockey playoffs are on.
Damn. You're OLD!
Perhaps. Perhaps you were 20 when you watched Ali/Quarry lol which would make me quite young.
LOL, I'm 47.
-
Re: 10 Most Accomplished of My Lifetime
Quote:
Originally Posted by
marbleheadmaui
Quote:
Originally Posted by
IamInuit
Quote:
Originally Posted by
marbleheadmaui
Quote:
Originally Posted by
IamInuit
Don't expect a fast answer. I will have to give this some thought. The first fight I watched live was Ali/Chuvalo in 66 lol. In addition the hockey playoffs are on.
Damn. You're OLD!
Perhaps. Perhaps you were 20 when you watched Ali/Quarry lol which would make me quite young.
LOL, I'm 47.
52. Lol we started watching at roughly the same age. 8.
-
Re: 10 Most Accomplished of My Lifetime
I can't see how you can leave out Roy Jones jr and then there is Bob Foster who was Light Heavy king from 1968-1974 and only lost to Ali and Frazier in that time.
-
Re: 10 Most Accomplished of My Lifetime
Quote:
Originally Posted by
DaxxKahn
Interesting thread...
Ali- He is Ali what else is there to say, 1st 3 time LEGIT HW champion, beat more HW legends then any other 2 hwts combined...reinvented himself more then once...Again he is Ali his accomplishments speak for themselves
Mike Tyson- Like Ali an easy answer is He's Mike Tyson and that should be good enough. His best days had questionable comp but man did he walk through guys, Until his decline he dominated like no other HW...His over all attraction to the sport...Youngest HW champion, some of the largest live gates ever, one of if not the biggest PPV attraction of all time...remember PPV was just getting off the ground when Tyson was selling more then most of todays guys...He always kept you wanting more!!! Not many fighters have that ability despite what they can do in the ring
Roy Jones Jr- Middleweight, Super Middleweight, Light Heavyweight and HW champion, had skill we had never seen ina fighter, his athletic ability at MW and SMW were nothing short of jaw dropping, he DOMINATED his weight classes for years..5 or 6 time time world champion
Oscar De La Hoya- six division world champion, maybe the most popular fighter since Ali in terms of fanbase and drawing ability, fought the best competiton available he sought them out!!! Faced JCC, Pernell, Hopkins, PBF, Mosley, Trinidad, Quartey, Pacquiao.Vargas, Campas, Gatti, JJL, Paez, Ruelas, Hernandez,Camacho and the list goes on...Plus went on to be one of the most successful promoters ever....DLH wins even when he loses because he doesnt lose fans and uses the bout to further boxing one way or another
Sugar Ray Leonard- WW, JMW, MW, SMW and LHW world champion, fought Hagler, Hearns, Duran, Benitez, was not until after some wars and eye injuries did he ever look ordinary, popular top resume champion 5 weight classes three of the most memorible rivalries ever.....
Thanks for your thoughts. A couple of counters
1. The only way Tyson can make a list like this is if you add entertainment as a criteria. He was a THE MAN champ with two defenses. And he was NOT the champion until he defeated Spinks. More on that below.
2. The equating of alphabet belts with true champions is a curse of the last 15 years. It literally is Bullspit. If you're an American it is equating division champs with the World Series Champ. If you're a soccer fan it is like equating World Cup semi-finalists with the WC champion. The alphabet straps literally are meaningless in determining a champion. For that concept to have meaning in boxing it is because the title is WORLD Champion. That means there can only be one per division at a time.
Let's look at Roy Jones as an example.
160-He beat BHOP for a vacant strap. At the time BHOP was the 8th ranked middle in the world. At the time the middles were a mess and stayed that way for another seven years. In NO sense was Jones CHAMPION here the way Hagler or Monzon was.
168-Again, an enormously muddled division. Jones claim rests on his defeat of James Toney. A GREAT win. But why was Toney a strapholder? he'd taken it from Tony Thornton, ranked #8 at 168. The lineal champion at that time was Michael Nunn who had taken the crown from Victor Cordoba who had taken it from Chris Tiozzo etc. Roy has no legit claim here either.
175-This one is easiest of all. Darius Michlashewski won, in the ring, every belt Roy held here. It was simply stripped because Darius wouldn't pay sanctioning fees...and Roy wouldn't fight him. Zero claim
Heavyweight-John Ruiz? Come on. Lennox Lewis was the lineal champ in a line going back all the way to Patterson.
A last point on Jones. He had monster TALENT, his skill set was seriously deficient. His footwork was awful, he had no jab, his balance was only ok, it's just that he was blessed with such amazing natural gifts he was able to win in spite of mediocre skills.
By comparison, in the days of eight divisions and one champ per? THE WORST champion had the equivalent of eight of today's belts and two division champions like Robinson had the equivalent of 16 and Henry Armstrong held every belt between 126 and 154. That's 24 belts.
See how silly this gets when one values the alphabet straps!
Oscar was THE MAN in two divisions. A fine fighter. But the only way he makes a list like this is if you count entertainment value rather than in-ring accomplishment.
Leonard belongs though I think my reasons are far better than yours ;)
-
Re: 10 Most Accomplished of My Lifetime
Quote:
Originally Posted by
THE THIRD MAN
I can't see how you can leave out Roy Jones jr and then there is Bob Foster who was Light Heavy king from 1968-1974 and only lost to Ali and Frazier in that time.
Outside of Charles and maybe Spinks I dont really see many having a shot.
-
Re: 10 Most Accomplished of My Lifetime
Quote:
Originally Posted by
DaxxKahn
Pernell Whitaker- This guy was slick as hell in the ring...I wish he was prime today a bout against Mayweather would be a boxing fans dream in terms of tecnique...was a world champion in one form or another for almost a decade....one of the greatest boxers of all time who until his later years when he stopped training as hard as he partied he was unbeatable
Roberto Duran- Over 100 career wins, was champion in 4 weight classes, had some of the most memorable fights win or lose of the last 40 years, tough as nails and overtime we thought he was done at an elite level he came back to prove the world wrong...The announcement of his name gave fans goosebumps because they knew they were in for a war...Was one of the most intimidating fighters of all time as well
Floyd Mayweather JR- Love him or hate him you can not deny his skill set and the fact he has claimed world titles in 5 weight classes, one of the most defensively skilled fighters ever. Can be exciting if he chooses but no matter what he gives us some sort of clinic against elite opponents one of the era biggest draws recently long time pound for pound best one of the ATG's and most successful fighters period let alone of my time
Manny Pacquiao- Again Love him or hate him the man holds titles in 8 different weight classes, has fought and beaten some of our eras biggest legends...only legitimate loss in his career is against Morales (You cant count losses at 15,16 yrs old in bouts against grown men) Only truly tested against JMM...Made himself a legend by battering bigger men.....An international celebertiy that just adds attention to the sport...pound for pound kingpin like Floyd one of the most successful fighters ever not just of my generation
Sweet Pea and Duran though again my resons are better ;)
Floyd's "skill set" has never, by his own choices, been fully vetted (unlike everyone else on my list). Being a great defender against an over the hill Oscar or a good, but not great JL Castillo just isn't the same thing as performing against a Chavez or an Azumah (Sweet Pea) or against a Duran or Hagler (Leonard). It is all about competition level.
The eight belt garbage about Manny is just that, garbage. he has a legit claim at 112, 126, 130 and 140. Amazing
-
Re: 10 Most Accomplished of My Lifetime
Quote:
Originally Posted by
marbleheadmaui
Quote:
Originally Posted by
IamInuit
Quote:
Originally Posted by
marbleheadmaui
Quote:
Originally Posted by
IamInuit
Don't expect a fast answer. I will have to give this some thought. The first fight I watched live was Ali/Chuvalo in 66 lol. In addition the hockey playoffs are on.
Damn. You're OLD!
Perhaps. Perhaps you were 20 when you watched Ali/Quarry lol which would make me quite young.
LOL, I'm 47.
Ah so we have a baby boomer here!
-
Re: 10 Most Accomplished of My Lifetime
Quote:
Originally Posted by
THE THIRD MAN
I can't see how you can leave out Roy Jones jr and then there is Bob Foster who was Light Heavy king from 1968-1974 and only lost to Ali and Frazier in that time.
Leaving Jones out was easy :)
He doesn't have a legit claim as Champion in any division and he left waaaaay too many guys unfought. Now was he an extraordinary combination of speed and power? You betcha!
I should be SHOT for not mentioning the Sherriff. [Cue Bob Marley]
-
Re: 10 Most Accomplished of My Lifetime
Quote:
Originally Posted by
marbleheadmaui
Quote:
Originally Posted by
THE THIRD MAN
I can't see how you can leave out Roy Jones jr and then there is Bob Foster who was Light Heavy king from 1968-1974 and only lost to Ali and Frazier in that time.
Leaving Jones out was easy :)
He doesn't have a legit claim as Champion in any division and he left waaaaay too many guys unfought. Now was he an extraordinary combination of speed and power? You betcha!
I should be SHOT for not mentioning the Sherriff. [Cue Bob Marley]
Now we have an issue. Pretzel logic friend.
-
Re: 10 Most Accomplished of My Lifetime
Quote:
Originally Posted by
IamInuit
Quote:
Originally Posted by
marbleheadmaui
Quote:
Originally Posted by
THE THIRD MAN
I can't see how you can leave out Roy Jones jr and then there is Bob Foster who was Light Heavy king from 1968-1974 and only lost to Ali and Frazier in that time.
Leaving Jones out was easy :)
He doesn't have a legit claim as Champion in any division and he left waaaaay too many guys unfought. Now was he an extraordinary combination of speed and power? You betcha!
I should be SHOT for not mentioning the Sherriff. [Cue Bob Marley]
Now we have an issue. Pretzel logic friend.
I realize I'd be shot, not the Sherriff, but how bout a little slack?
-
Re: 10 Most Accomplished of My Lifetime
Quote:
Originally Posted by
IamInuit
Quote:
Originally Posted by
THE THIRD MAN
I can't see how you can leave out Roy Jones jr and then there is Bob Foster who was Light Heavy king from 1968-1974 and only lost to Ali and Frazier in that time.
Outside of Charles and maybe Spinks I dont really see many having a shot.
I assume you mean against Jones. See I think a really good technician like say a Harold Johnson would use his craft to beat Jones handily. MAB gave us a great example when he beat Hamed what happens when good talent plus craft runs into great talent with technical flaws. I mean Hamed was faster, stronger, had better reflexes and got crushed.
The list of guys at 175 who'd give Jones real trouble I think is double digits.
What I wonder about with Jones is had he been born in 1922 and HAD to learn his craft to survive in the 1940's, how amazing could he have become? THAT is a scary proposition!
-
Re: 10 Most Accomplished of My Lifetime
Quote:
Originally Posted by
marbleheadmaui
Let's look at Roy Jones as an example.
160-He beat BHOP for a vacant strap. At the time BHOP was the 8th ranked middle in the world. At the time the middles were a mess and stayed that way for another seven years. In NO sense was Jones CHAMPION here the way Hagler or Monzon was.
168-Again, an enormously muddled division. Jones claim rests on his defeat of James Toney. A GREAT win. But why was Toney a strapholder? he'd taken it from Tony Thornton, ranked #8 at 168. The lineal champion at that time was Michael Nunn who had taken the crown from Victor Cordoba who had taken it from Chris Tiozzo etc. Roy has no legit claim here either.
175-This one is easiest of all. Darius Michlashewski won, in the ring, every belt Roy held here. It was simply stripped because Darius wouldn't pay sanctioning fees...and Roy wouldn't fight him. Zero claim
Heavyweight-John Ruiz? Come on. Lennox Lewis was the lineal champ in a line going back all the way to Patterson.
A last point on Jones. He had monster TALENT, his skill set was seriously deficient. His footwork was awful, he had no jab, his balance was only ok, it's just that he was blessed with such amazing natural gifts he was able to win in spite of mediocre skills.
That's not entirely true. It depends on how you look at the lineal line after Michael Spinks vacated. Some consider Virgil Hill's defeat of Henry Maske as the beginning of the next line of succession, but a good amount trace the title through Roy Jones. The lineal championship at Light Heavyweight is very much a subject to dispute
-
Re: 10 Most Accomplished of My Lifetime
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Violent Demise
Quote:
Originally Posted by
marbleheadmaui
Let's look at Roy Jones as an example.
160-He beat BHOP for a vacant strap. At the time BHOP was the 8th ranked middle in the world. At the time the middles were a mess and stayed that way for another seven years. In NO sense was Jones CHAMPION here the way Hagler or Monzon was.
168-Again, an enormously muddled division. Jones claim rests on his defeat of James Toney. A GREAT win. But why was Toney a strapholder? he'd taken it from Tony Thornton, ranked #8 at 168. The lineal champion at that time was Michael Nunn who had taken the crown from Victor Cordoba who had taken it from Chris Tiozzo etc. Roy has no legit claim here either.
175-This one is easiest of all. Darius Michlashewski won, in the ring, every belt Roy held here. It was simply stripped because Darius wouldn't pay sanctioning fees...and Roy wouldn't fight him. Zero claim
Heavyweight-John Ruiz? Come on. Lennox Lewis was the lineal champ in a line going back all the way to Patterson.
A last point on Jones. He had monster TALENT, his skill set was seriously deficient. His footwork was awful, he had no jab, his balance was only ok, it's just that he was blessed with such amazing natural gifts he was able to win in spite of mediocre skills.
That's not entirely true. It depends on how you look at the lineal line after Michael Spinks vacated. Some consider Virgil Hill's defeat of Henry Maske as the beginning of the next line of succession, but a good amount trace the title through Roy Jones. The lineal championship at Light Heavyweight is very much a subject to dispute
Fair point. I'd argue that the best possible choice for creating a new line was Virgil Hill. Then he lost to Darius. Darius remained active until he lost to...I dunno? was it Tiozzo?
I guess one could make the argument that the crown remained vacant past Hill, but then how does Jones get THE claim over say Darius then?
-
Re: 10 Most Accomplished of My Lifetime
Quote:
Originally Posted by
marbleheadmaui
Quote:
Originally Posted by
IamInuit
Quote:
Originally Posted by
marbleheadmaui
Quote:
Originally Posted by
THE THIRD MAN
I can't see how you can leave out Roy Jones jr and then there is Bob Foster who was Light Heavy king from 1968-1974 and only lost to Ali and Frazier in that time.
Leaving Jones out was easy :)
He doesn't have a legit claim as Champion in any division and he left waaaaay too many guys unfought. Now was he an extraordinary combination of speed and power? You betcha!
I should be SHOT for not mentioning the Sherriff. [Cue Bob Marley]
Now we have an issue. Pretzel logic friend.
I realize I'd be shot, not the Sherriff, but how bout a little slack?
Yup he could have fought Watson, Collins, Eubank, Benn. They could have also fought him in that 160/68 area. People seem to forget what a machine this man was at 160/168/ 175. Dariusz ducked Roy just as much as Roy ducked him. Jones was the man at 175 regardless of his collection of tin. He would have kicked the snot out of Dariusz.
-
Re: 10 Most Accomplished of My Lifetime
Quote:
Originally Posted by
marbleheadmaui
Quote:
Originally Posted by
IamInuit
Quote:
Originally Posted by
THE THIRD MAN
I can't see how you can leave out Roy Jones jr and then there is Bob Foster who was Light Heavy king from 1968-1974 and only lost to Ali and Frazier in that time.
Outside of Charles and maybe Spinks I dont really see many having a shot.
I assume you mean against Jones. See I think a really good technician like say a Harold Johnson would use his craft to beat Jones handily. MAB gave us a great example when he beat Hamed what happens when good talent plus craft runs into great talent with technical flaws. I mean Hamed was faster, stronger, had better reflexes and got crushed.
The list of guys at 175 who'd give Jones real trouble I think is double digits.
What I wonder about with Jones is had he been born in 1922 and HAD to learn his craft to survive in the 1940's, how amazing could he have become? THAT is a scary proposition!
Both testicles for a time machine. Ok 1. Make it the left one. No right. Just cut one off.
-
Re: 10 Most Accomplished of My Lifetime
Quote:
Originally Posted by
IamInuit
Quote:
Originally Posted by
marbleheadmaui
Quote:
Originally Posted by
IamInuit
Quote:
Originally Posted by
marbleheadmaui
Quote:
Originally Posted by
THE THIRD MAN
I can't see how you can leave out Roy Jones jr and then there is Bob Foster who was Light Heavy king from 1968-1974 and only lost to Ali and Frazier in that time.
Leaving Jones out was easy :)
He doesn't have a legit claim as Champion in any division and he left waaaaay too many guys unfought. Now was he an extraordinary combination of speed and power? You betcha!
I should be SHOT for not mentioning the Sherriff. [Cue Bob Marley]
Now we have an issue. Pretzel logic friend.
I realize I'd be shot, not the Sherriff, but how bout a little slack?
Yup he could have fought Watson, Collins, Eubank, Benn. They could have also fought him in that 160/68 area. People seem to forget what a machine this man was at 160/168/ 175. Dariusz ducked Roy just as much as Roy ducked him. Jones was the man at 175 regardless of his collection of tin. He would have kicked the snot out of Dariusz.
Yeah and Tyson would have kicked the snot out of Douglas and Duran would have kicked the snot out of Laing and Chiquita would have buried Roland Pascua ;)
You know and I know a fighter has either done it or he hasn't. Woulda coulda shoulda carries no weight.
-
Re: 10 Most Accomplished of My Lifetime
Quote:
Originally Posted by
IamInuit
Quote:
Originally Posted by
marbleheadmaui
Quote:
Originally Posted by
IamInuit
Quote:
Originally Posted by
THE THIRD MAN
I can't see how you can leave out Roy Jones jr and then there is Bob Foster who was Light Heavy king from 1968-1974 and only lost to Ali and Frazier in that time.
Outside of Charles and maybe Spinks I dont really see many having a shot.
I assume you mean against Jones. See I think a really good technician like say a Harold Johnson would use his craft to beat Jones handily. MAB gave us a great example when he beat Hamed what happens when good talent plus craft runs into great talent with technical flaws. I mean Hamed was faster, stronger, had better reflexes and got crushed.
The list of guys at 175 who'd give Jones real trouble I think is double digits.
What I wonder about with Jones is had he been born in 1922 and HAD to learn his craft to survive in the 1940's, how amazing could he have become? THAT is a scary proposition!
Both testicles for a time machine. Ok 1. Make it the left one. No right. Just cut one off.
LOL! Yeah me too...I might give up an ear as well!
-
Re: 10 Most Accomplished of My Lifetime
Quote:
Originally Posted by
marbleheadmaui
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Violent Demise
Quote:
Originally Posted by
marbleheadmaui
Let's look at Roy Jones as an example.
160-He beat BHOP for a vacant strap. At the time BHOP was the 8th ranked middle in the world. At the time the middles were a mess and stayed that way for another seven years. In NO sense was Jones CHAMPION here the way Hagler or Monzon was.
168-Again, an enormously muddled division. Jones claim rests on his defeat of James Toney. A GREAT win. But why was Toney a strapholder? he'd taken it from Tony Thornton, ranked #8 at 168. The lineal champion at that time was Michael Nunn who had taken the crown from Victor Cordoba who had taken it from Chris Tiozzo etc. Roy has no legit claim here either.
175-This one is easiest of all. Darius Michlashewski won, in the ring, every belt Roy held here. It was simply stripped because Darius wouldn't pay sanctioning fees...and Roy wouldn't fight him. Zero claim
Heavyweight-John Ruiz? Come on. Lennox Lewis was the lineal champ in a line going back all the way to Patterson.
A last point on Jones. He had monster TALENT, his skill set was seriously deficient. His footwork was awful, he had no jab, his balance was only ok, it's just that he was blessed with such amazing natural gifts he was able to win in spite of mediocre skills.
That's not entirely true. It depends on how you look at the lineal line after Michael Spinks vacated. Some consider Virgil Hill's defeat of Henry Maske as the beginning of the next line of succession, but a good amount trace the title through Roy Jones. The lineal championship at Light Heavyweight is very much a subject to dispute
Fair point. I'd argue that the best possible choice for creating a new line was Virgil Hill. Then he lost to Darius. Darius remained active until he lost to...I dunno? was it Tiozzo?
I guess one could make the argument that the crown remained vacant past Hill, but then how does Jones get THE claim over say Darius then?
It depends on how you look at it. The following is from someone who traces the title through Jones. I'm not supporting it personally. But it does make a lot of sense.
On 21st September 1985, Spinks made history by dethroning world heavyweight champion Larry Holmes and became the first lineal light heavyweight champion to topple a reigning lineal heavyweight title-holder.
Naturally, with heavyweight fame beckoning, he vacated his light heavyweight title and, predictably, there was mass confusion with the alphabet groups frantically filling vacancies like pigs at a trough.
Thereafter, there was no clear-cut lineage, and Boxing Illustrated magazine, which was naming one rightful world champion per division at the time, had their light heavyweight title vacant during this period.
Finally, in November 1996, something happened. WBA belt-holder Virgil Hill and IBF belt-holder Henry Maske fought each other in Germany on 23rd November and the winner was Hill. However, during the same month, Roy Jones beat Mike McCallum for the WBC belt. Jones had already beaten James Toney in 1994, who had been on an eye-catching winning streak; he had wins over Iran Barkley and Tim Littles amongst others (the needless super middleweight division is not recognized and therefore these were light heavyweight bouts). At this time, Jones was certainly the most talented fighter in the picture.
Some observers supported the Hill-Maske bout as being for the true world championship, but Jones could really not be discounted from the equation. In addition, a chain of succession existed; Hill had lost to Thomas Hearns on 3rd June 1991. Hearns was then beaten by Barkley, who was beaten by Toney, who was beaten by Jones.
On 13th June 1997, Hill lost to Dariusz Michalczewski, and Michalczewski embarked on a quest to face the most obscure opponents he could find. He fulfilled this quest by finding the likes of Darren Zenner and Muslim Biarslanov to pound on. Who were these guys? Maybe nobody knows. There was a strong argument that he essentially boxed his way out of contention by feasting on one soft touch after another. Why should he be rewarded for taking such an easy path?
Initially, the division needed a Jones-Hill bout to decide who would be the next rightful champ, but Jones lost to Montell Griffin on 21st March 1997. However, he beat Griffin in a rematch on 7th August the same year, and then there was hope for a Jones- Michalczewski match. But this wasn’t happening. While it could be argued that Michalczewski’s momentum disappeared as he continued to face no-hopers, Jones rose to greater heights after defeating Hill and Lou Del Valle.
Meanwhile, Reggie Johnson penetrated the scene with wins over William Guthrie, Ole Klemetsen and Willie Taylor, all decent opposition. Was this enough to overtake Michalczewski? At the very least he caught up with him and was on equal footing.
Johnson faced Jones on 5th June 1999, and this could be viewed as being for the vacant world championship. Any fight for the championship had to include Jones, who was an outstanding talent.
Ring Magazine is also another one who traces it through Jones
-
Re: 10 Most Accomplished of My Lifetime
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Violent Demise
Quote:
Originally Posted by
marbleheadmaui
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Violent Demise
Quote:
Originally Posted by
marbleheadmaui
Let's look at Roy Jones as an example.
160-He beat BHOP for a vacant strap. At the time BHOP was the 8th ranked middle in the world. At the time the middles were a mess and stayed that way for another seven years. In NO sense was Jones CHAMPION here the way Hagler or Monzon was.
168-Again, an enormously muddled division. Jones claim rests on his defeat of James Toney. A GREAT win. But why was Toney a strapholder? he'd taken it from Tony Thornton, ranked #8 at 168. The lineal champion at that time was Michael Nunn who had taken the crown from Victor Cordoba who had taken it from Chris Tiozzo etc. Roy has no legit claim here either.
175-This one is easiest of all. Darius Michlashewski won, in the ring, every belt Roy held here. It was simply stripped because Darius wouldn't pay sanctioning fees...and Roy wouldn't fight him. Zero claim
Heavyweight-John Ruiz? Come on. Lennox Lewis was the lineal champ in a line going back all the way to Patterson.
A last point on Jones. He had monster TALENT, his skill set was seriously deficient. His footwork was awful, he had no jab, his balance was only ok, it's just that he was blessed with such amazing natural gifts he was able to win in spite of mediocre skills.
That's not entirely true. It depends on how you look at the lineal line after Michael Spinks vacated. Some consider Virgil Hill's defeat of Henry Maske as the beginning of the next line of succession, but a good amount trace the title through Roy Jones. The lineal championship at Light Heavyweight is very much a subject to dispute
Fair point. I'd argue that the best possible choice for creating a new line was Virgil Hill. Then he lost to Darius. Darius remained active until he lost to...I dunno? was it Tiozzo?
I guess one could make the argument that the crown remained vacant past Hill, but then how does Jones get THE claim over say Darius then?
It depends on how you look at it. The following is from someone who traces the title through Jones. I'm not supporting it personally. But it does make a lot of sense.
On 21st September 1985, Spinks made history by dethroning world heavyweight champion Larry Holmes and became the first lineal light heavyweight champion to topple a reigning lineal heavyweight title-holder.
Naturally, with heavyweight fame beckoning, he vacated his light heavyweight title and, predictably, there was mass confusion with the alphabet groups frantically filling vacancies like pigs at a trough.
Thereafter, there was no clear-cut lineage, and Boxing Illustrated magazine, which was naming one rightful world champion per division at the time, had their light heavyweight title vacant during this period.
Finally, in November 1996, something happened. WBA belt-holder Virgil Hill and IBF belt-holder Henry Maske fought each other in Germany on 23rd November and the winner was Hill. However, during the same month, Roy Jones beat Mike McCallum for the WBC belt. Jones had already beaten James Toney in 1994, who had been on an eye-catching winning streak; he had wins over Iran Barkley and Tim Littles amongst others (the needless super middleweight division is not recognized and therefore these were light heavyweight bouts). At this time, Jones was certainly the most talented fighter in the picture.
Some observers supported the Hill-Maske bout as being for the true world championship, but Jones could really not be discounted from the equation. In addition, a chain of succession existed; Hill had lost to Thomas Hearns on 3rd June 1991. Hearns was then beaten by Barkley, who was beaten by Toney, who was beaten by Jones.
On 13th June 1997, Hill lost to Dariusz Michalczewski, and Michalczewski embarked on a quest to face the most obscure opponents he could find. He fulfilled this quest by finding the likes of Darren Zenner and Muslim Biarslanov to pound on. Who were these guys? Maybe nobody knows. There was a strong argument that he essentially boxed his way out of contention by feasting on one soft touch after another. Why should he be rewarded for taking such an easy path?
Initially, the division needed a Jones-Hill bout to decide who would be the next rightful champ, but Jones lost to Montell Griffin on 21st March 1997. However, he beat Griffin in a rematch on 7th August the same year, and then there was hope for a Jones- Michalczewski match. But this wasn’t happening. While it could be argued that Michalczewski’s momentum disappeared as he continued to face no-hopers, Jones rose to greater heights after defeating Hill and Lou Del Valle.
Meanwhile, Reggie Johnson penetrated the scene with wins over William Guthrie, Ole Klemetsen and Willie Taylor, all decent opposition. Was this enough to overtake Michalczewski? At the very least he caught up with him and was on equal footing.
Johnson faced Jones on 5th June 1999, and this could be viewed as being for the vacant world championship. Any fight for the championship had to include Jones, who was an outstanding talent.
Ring Magazine is also another one who traces it through Jones
Well I must admit I like the starting point, simply denying the 168 division (my personal least favorite) exists in the first place! :)
But it really is an odd way to begin isn't it? I also got a kick out of the complaints about Darius (which are fair enough) and then justifies it because Jones fights...Lou Del Valle? :) Hadn't Lou lost to Virgil previously? Doesn't that render the rest of their argument regarding Hearns and Barkley etc kinda tough to support? Reggie Johnson was a good fighter, but HE's in the ring to determine the lineal champ? based on what?
Yeah Ring just got sick of Darius and said screw it and named Jones the guy after he beat Gonzales and Harmon.
I may just be outvoted here. The classy thing to do at this point would probably be to concede defeat.
Me? I'm gonna hold my breath and stomp my foot and see if that changes Ring Magazine and Boxing Illustrated's mind.
-
Re: 10 Most Accomplished of My Lifetime
With such a talented fighter such as Jones it is mind boggling that he was never a lineal champ! Kind of reminds me of Donaire, an extremely gifted fighter that has yet been a lineal champ.
And most boxing fans and historians just go with the lineal title anyways. I mean when John Ruiz gets to claim he was a HW champ like Ali and Louis, then you know the alphabet titles don't mean shit.
-
Re: 10 Most Accomplished of My Lifetime
Quote:
Originally Posted by
marbleheadmaui
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Violent Demise
Quote:
Originally Posted by
marbleheadmaui
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Violent Demise
Quote:
Originally Posted by
marbleheadmaui
Let's look at Roy Jones as an example.
160-He beat BHOP for a vacant strap. At the time BHOP was the 8th ranked middle in the world. At the time the middles were a mess and stayed that way for another seven years. In NO sense was Jones CHAMPION here the way Hagler or Monzon was.
168-Again, an enormously muddled division. Jones claim rests on his defeat of James Toney. A GREAT win. But why was Toney a strapholder? he'd taken it from Tony Thornton, ranked #8 at 168. The lineal champion at that time was Michael Nunn who had taken the crown from Victor Cordoba who had taken it from Chris Tiozzo etc. Roy has no legit claim here either.
175-This one is easiest of all. Darius Michlashewski won, in the ring, every belt Roy held here. It was simply stripped because Darius wouldn't pay sanctioning fees...and Roy wouldn't fight him. Zero claim
Heavyweight-John Ruiz? Come on. Lennox Lewis was the lineal champ in a line going back all the way to Patterson.
A last point on Jones. He had monster TALENT, his skill set was seriously deficient. His footwork was awful, he had no jab, his balance was only ok, it's just that he was blessed with such amazing natural gifts he was able to win in spite of mediocre skills.
That's not entirely true. It depends on how you look at the lineal line after Michael Spinks vacated. Some consider Virgil Hill's defeat of Henry Maske as the beginning of the next line of succession, but a good amount trace the title through Roy Jones. The lineal championship at Light Heavyweight is very much a subject to dispute
Fair point. I'd argue that the best possible choice for creating a new line was Virgil Hill. Then he lost to Darius. Darius remained active until he lost to...I dunno? was it Tiozzo?
I guess one could make the argument that the crown remained vacant past Hill, but then how does Jones get THE claim over say Darius then?
It depends on how you look at it. The following is from someone who traces the title through Jones. I'm not supporting it personally. But it does make a lot of sense.
On 21st September 1985, Spinks made history by dethroning world heavyweight champion Larry Holmes and became the first lineal light heavyweight champion to topple a reigning lineal heavyweight title-holder.
Naturally, with heavyweight fame beckoning, he vacated his light heavyweight title and, predictably, there was mass confusion with the alphabet groups frantically filling vacancies like pigs at a trough.
Thereafter, there was no clear-cut lineage, and Boxing Illustrated magazine, which was naming one rightful world champion per division at the time, had their light heavyweight title vacant during this period.
Finally, in November 1996, something happened. WBA belt-holder Virgil Hill and IBF belt-holder Henry Maske fought each other in Germany on 23rd November and the winner was Hill. However, during the same month, Roy Jones beat Mike McCallum for the WBC belt. Jones had already beaten James Toney in 1994, who had been on an eye-catching winning streak; he had wins over Iran Barkley and Tim Littles amongst others (the needless super middleweight division is not recognized and therefore these were light heavyweight bouts). At this time, Jones was certainly the most talented fighter in the picture.
Some observers supported the Hill-Maske bout as being for the true world championship, but Jones could really not be discounted from the equation. In addition, a chain of succession existed; Hill had lost to Thomas Hearns on 3rd June 1991. Hearns was then beaten by Barkley, who was beaten by Toney, who was beaten by Jones.
On 13th June 1997, Hill lost to Dariusz Michalczewski, and Michalczewski embarked on a quest to face the most obscure opponents he could find. He fulfilled this quest by finding the likes of Darren Zenner and Muslim Biarslanov to pound on. Who were these guys? Maybe nobody knows. There was a strong argument that he essentially boxed his way out of contention by feasting on one soft touch after another. Why should he be rewarded for taking such an easy path?
Initially, the division needed a Jones-Hill bout to decide who would be the next rightful champ, but Jones lost to Montell Griffin on 21st March 1997. However, he beat Griffin in a rematch on 7th August the same year, and then there was hope for a Jones- Michalczewski match. But this wasn’t happening. While it could be argued that Michalczewski’s momentum disappeared as he continued to face no-hopers, Jones rose to greater heights after defeating Hill and Lou Del Valle.
Meanwhile, Reggie Johnson penetrated the scene with wins over William Guthrie, Ole Klemetsen and Willie Taylor, all decent opposition. Was this enough to overtake Michalczewski? At the very least he caught up with him and was on equal footing.
Johnson faced Jones on 5th June 1999, and this could be viewed as being for the vacant world championship. Any fight for the championship had to include Jones, who was an outstanding talent.
Ring Magazine is also another one who traces it through Jones
Well I must admit I like the starting point, simply denying the 168 division (my personal least favorite) exists in the first place! :)
But it really is an odd way to begin isn't it? I also got a kick out of the complaints about Darius (which are fair enough) and then justifies it because Jones fights...Lou Del Valle? :) Hadn't Lou lost to Virgil previously? Doesn't that render the rest of their argument regarding Hearns and Barkley etc kinda tough to support? Reggie Johnson was a good fighter, but HE's in the ring to determine the lineal champ? based on what?
Yeah Ring just got sick of Darius and said screw it and named Jones the guy after he beat Gonzales and Harmon.
I may just be outvoted here. The classy thing to do at this point would probably be to concede defeat.
Me? I'm gonna hold my breath and stomp my foot and see if that changes Ring Magazine and Boxing Illustrated's mind.
Got a question for you. Why Hill-Maske? Why pick up the lineal line with them? They certainly weren't the 2 best fighters in the division. So why? Is it because they each held a title? That can't be the case. You been pretty much dismissing titles (which I don't blame you) in every discussion. Going by that would be a contradiction. So I'm curious as to why start with Hill-Maske
-
Re: 10 Most Accomplished of My Lifetime
Quote:
Originally Posted by
generalbulldog
With such a talented fighter such as Jones it is mind boggling that he was never a lineal champ! Kind of reminds me of Donaire, an extremely gifted fighter that has yet been a lineal champ.
And most boxing fans and historians just go with the lineal title anyways. I mean when John Ruiz gets to claim he was a HW champ like Ali and Louis, then you know the alphabet titles don't mean shit.
If I'm not mistaken I do believe Donaire is the Bantamweight lineal champion at this moment
-
Re: 10 Most Accomplished of My Lifetime
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Violent Demise
Quote:
Originally Posted by
marbleheadmaui
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Violent Demise
Quote:
Originally Posted by
marbleheadmaui
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Violent Demise
Quote:
Originally Posted by
marbleheadmaui
Let's look at Roy Jones as an example.
160-He beat BHOP for a vacant strap. At the time BHOP was the 8th ranked middle in the world. At the time the middles were a mess and stayed that way for another seven years. In NO sense was Jones CHAMPION here the way Hagler or Monzon was.
168-Again, an enormously muddled division. Jones claim rests on his defeat of James Toney. A GREAT win. But why was Toney a strapholder? he'd taken it from Tony Thornton, ranked #8 at 168. The lineal champion at that time was Michael Nunn who had taken the crown from Victor Cordoba who had taken it from Chris Tiozzo etc. Roy has no legit claim here either.
175-This one is easiest of all. Darius Michlashewski won, in the ring, every belt Roy held here. It was simply stripped because Darius wouldn't pay sanctioning fees...and Roy wouldn't fight him. Zero claim
Heavyweight-John Ruiz? Come on. Lennox Lewis was the lineal champ in a line going back all the way to Patterson.
A last point on Jones. He had monster TALENT, his skill set was seriously deficient. His footwork was awful, he had no jab, his balance was only ok, it's just that he was blessed with such amazing natural gifts he was able to win in spite of mediocre skills.
That's not entirely true. It depends on how you look at the lineal line after Michael Spinks vacated. Some consider Virgil Hill's defeat of Henry Maske as the beginning of the next line of succession, but a good amount trace the title through Roy Jones. The lineal championship at Light Heavyweight is very much a subject to dispute
Fair point. I'd argue that the best possible choice for creating a new line was Virgil Hill. Then he lost to Darius. Darius remained active until he lost to...I dunno? was it Tiozzo?
I guess one could make the argument that the crown remained vacant past Hill, but then how does Jones get THE claim over say Darius then?
It depends on how you look at it. The following is from someone who traces the title through Jones. I'm not supporting it personally. But it does make a lot of sense.
On 21st September 1985, Spinks made history by dethroning world heavyweight champion Larry Holmes and became the first lineal light heavyweight champion to topple a reigning lineal heavyweight title-holder.
Naturally, with heavyweight fame beckoning, he vacated his light heavyweight title and, predictably, there was mass confusion with the alphabet groups frantically filling vacancies like pigs at a trough.
Thereafter, there was no clear-cut lineage, and Boxing Illustrated magazine, which was naming one rightful world champion per division at the time, had their light heavyweight title vacant during this period.
Finally, in November 1996, something happened. WBA belt-holder Virgil Hill and IBF belt-holder Henry Maske fought each other in Germany on 23rd November and the winner was Hill. However, during the same month, Roy Jones beat Mike McCallum for the WBC belt. Jones had already beaten James Toney in 1994, who had been on an eye-catching winning streak; he had wins over Iran Barkley and Tim Littles amongst others (the needless super middleweight division is not recognized and therefore these were light heavyweight bouts). At this time, Jones was certainly the most talented fighter in the picture.
Some observers supported the Hill-Maske bout as being for the true world championship, but Jones could really not be discounted from the equation. In addition, a chain of succession existed; Hill had lost to Thomas Hearns on 3rd June 1991. Hearns was then beaten by Barkley, who was beaten by Toney, who was beaten by Jones.
On 13th June 1997, Hill lost to Dariusz Michalczewski, and Michalczewski embarked on a quest to face the most obscure opponents he could find. He fulfilled this quest by finding the likes of Darren Zenner and Muslim Biarslanov to pound on. Who were these guys? Maybe nobody knows. There was a strong argument that he essentially boxed his way out of contention by feasting on one soft touch after another. Why should he be rewarded for taking such an easy path?
Initially, the division needed a Jones-Hill bout to decide who would be the next rightful champ, but Jones lost to Montell Griffin on 21st March 1997. However, he beat Griffin in a rematch on 7th August the same year, and then there was hope for a Jones- Michalczewski match. But this wasn’t happening. While it could be argued that Michalczewski’s momentum disappeared as he continued to face no-hopers, Jones rose to greater heights after defeating Hill and Lou Del Valle.
Meanwhile, Reggie Johnson penetrated the scene with wins over William Guthrie, Ole Klemetsen and Willie Taylor, all decent opposition. Was this enough to overtake Michalczewski? At the very least he caught up with him and was on equal footing.
Johnson faced Jones on 5th June 1999, and this could be viewed as being for the vacant world championship. Any fight for the championship had to include Jones, who was an outstanding talent.
Ring Magazine is also another one who traces it through Jones
Well I must admit I like the starting point, simply denying the 168 division (my personal least favorite) exists in the first place! :)
But it really is an odd way to begin isn't it? I also got a kick out of the complaints about Darius (which are fair enough) and then justifies it because Jones fights...Lou Del Valle? :) Hadn't Lou lost to Virgil previously? Doesn't that render the rest of their argument regarding Hearns and Barkley etc kinda tough to support? Reggie Johnson was a good fighter, but HE's in the ring to determine the lineal champ? based on what?
Yeah Ring just got sick of Darius and said screw it and named Jones the guy after he beat Gonzales and Harmon.
I may just be outvoted here. The classy thing to do at this point would probably be to concede defeat.
Me? I'm gonna hold my breath and stomp my foot and see if that changes Ring Magazine and Boxing Illustrated's mind.
Got a question for you. Why Hill-Maske? Why pick up the lineal line with them? They certainly weren't the 2 best fighters in the division. So why? Is it because they each held a title? That can't be the case. You been pretty much dismissing titles (which I don't blame you) in every discussion. Going by that would be a contradiction. So I'm curious as to why start with Hill-Maske
Actually when they fought they were #'s 1 and 2 according to Ring Magazine IIRC. Maske had taken out Graciano, the Blade, Prince Charles and Virgil had beaten Tiozzo, Tate and Del Valle. The case isn't remotely ironclad, but it's a reasonable one in my view. It is also reasonable to say the title remained vacant until a later date. It becomes unclear to me then when a new line would begin that had a better case.
-
Re: 10 Most Accomplished of My Lifetime
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Violent Demise
Quote:
Originally Posted by
generalbulldog
With such a talented fighter such as Jones it is mind boggling that he was never a lineal champ! Kind of reminds me of Donaire, an extremely gifted fighter that has yet been a lineal champ.
And most boxing fans and historians just go with the lineal title anyways. I mean when John Ruiz gets to claim he was a HW champ like Ali and Louis, then you know the alphabet titles don't mean shit.
If I'm not mistaken I do believe Donaire is the Bantamweight lineal champion at this moment
I think the last guy who clearly was that was probably the guy who beat Gaby Canizales who beat Sandoval who beat Jeff Chandler who beat Sol;is who beat Lujan who beat Zamora who beat I dunno. Paningo? From Columbia? Maybe Venezuela? I think (could be wrong) he retired.
I think one could argue pretty convincingly that Rafael Marquez did enough to begin a new line, but he never lost and moved up too. So THEN who are we left with? Hawsegawa? I guess the question is do you think he did enough to start a new line. He had big wins over Sahaprom, but Sahaprom had never faced Raffy and I think was the weaker beltholder in terms of competition faced. So I don't think Nonito gets there...YET.
But I think the winner of Nonito the Mares/Agbeko victor is going to have a pretty good claim.
-
Re: 10 Most Accomplished of My Lifetime
Quote:
Originally Posted by
marbleheadmaui
Quote:
Originally Posted by
IamInuit
Quote:
Originally Posted by
marbleheadmaui
Quote:
Originally Posted by
IamInuit
Don't expect a fast answer. I will have to give this some thought. The first fight I watched live was Ali/Chuvalo in 66 lol. In addition the hockey playoffs are on.
Damn. You're OLD!
Perhaps. Perhaps you were 20 when you watched Ali/Quarry lol which would make me quite young.
LOL, I'm 47.
Then you are young.
-
Re: 10 Most Accomplished of My Lifetime
Quote:
Originally Posted by
marbleheadmaui
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Violent Demise
Quote:
Originally Posted by
marbleheadmaui
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Violent Demise
Quote:
Originally Posted by
marbleheadmaui
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Violent Demise
Quote:
Originally Posted by
marbleheadmaui
Let's look at Roy Jones as an example.
160-He beat BHOP for a vacant strap. At the time BHOP was the 8th ranked middle in the world. At the time the middles were a mess and stayed that way for another seven years. In NO sense was Jones CHAMPION here the way Hagler or Monzon was.
168-Again, an enormously muddled division. Jones claim rests on his defeat of James Toney. A GREAT win. But why was Toney a strapholder? he'd taken it from Tony Thornton, ranked #8 at 168. The lineal champion at that time was Michael Nunn who had taken the crown from Victor Cordoba who had taken it from Chris Tiozzo etc. Roy has no legit claim here either.
175-This one is easiest of all. Darius Michlashewski won, in the ring, every belt Roy held here. It was simply stripped because Darius wouldn't pay sanctioning fees...and Roy wouldn't fight him. Zero claim
Heavyweight-John Ruiz? Come on. Lennox Lewis was the lineal champ in a line going back all the way to Patterson.
A last point on Jones. He had monster TALENT, his skill set was seriously deficient. His footwork was awful, he had no jab, his balance was only ok, it's just that he was blessed with such amazing natural gifts he was able to win in spite of mediocre skills.
That's not entirely true. It depends on how you look at the lineal line after Michael Spinks vacated. Some consider Virgil Hill's defeat of Henry Maske as the beginning of the next line of succession, but a good amount trace the title through Roy Jones. The lineal championship at Light Heavyweight is very much a subject to dispute
Fair point. I'd argue that the best possible choice for creating a new line was Virgil Hill. Then he lost to Darius. Darius remained active until he lost to...I dunno? was it Tiozzo?
I guess one could make the argument that the crown remained vacant past Hill, but then how does Jones get THE claim over say Darius then?
It depends on how you look at it. The following is from someone who traces the title through Jones. I'm not supporting it personally. But it does make a lot of sense.
On 21st September 1985, Spinks made history by dethroning world heavyweight champion Larry Holmes and became the first lineal light heavyweight champion to topple a reigning lineal heavyweight title-holder.
Naturally, with heavyweight fame beckoning, he vacated his light heavyweight title and, predictably, there was mass confusion with the alphabet groups frantically filling vacancies like pigs at a trough.
Thereafter, there was no clear-cut lineage, and Boxing Illustrated magazine, which was naming one rightful world champion per division at the time, had their light heavyweight title vacant during this period.
Finally, in November 1996, something happened. WBA belt-holder Virgil Hill and IBF belt-holder Henry Maske fought each other in Germany on 23rd November and the winner was Hill. However, during the same month, Roy Jones beat Mike McCallum for the WBC belt. Jones had already beaten James Toney in 1994, who had been on an eye-catching winning streak; he had wins over Iran Barkley and Tim Littles amongst others (the needless super middleweight division is not recognized and therefore these were light heavyweight bouts). At this time, Jones was certainly the most talented fighter in the picture.
Some observers supported the Hill-Maske bout as being for the true world championship, but Jones could really not be discounted from the equation. In addition, a chain of succession existed; Hill had lost to Thomas Hearns on 3rd June 1991. Hearns was then beaten by Barkley, who was beaten by Toney, who was beaten by Jones.
On 13th June 1997, Hill lost to Dariusz Michalczewski, and Michalczewski embarked on a quest to face the most obscure opponents he could find. He fulfilled this quest by finding the likes of Darren Zenner and Muslim Biarslanov to pound on. Who were these guys? Maybe nobody knows. There was a strong argument that he essentially boxed his way out of contention by feasting on one soft touch after another. Why should he be rewarded for taking such an easy path?
Initially, the division needed a Jones-Hill bout to decide who would be the next rightful champ, but Jones lost to Montell Griffin on 21st March 1997. However, he beat Griffin in a rematch on 7th August the same year, and then there was hope for a Jones- Michalczewski match. But this wasn’t happening. While it could be argued that Michalczewski’s momentum disappeared as he continued to face no-hopers, Jones rose to greater heights after defeating Hill and Lou Del Valle.
Meanwhile, Reggie Johnson penetrated the scene with wins over William Guthrie, Ole Klemetsen and Willie Taylor, all decent opposition. Was this enough to overtake Michalczewski? At the very least he caught up with him and was on equal footing.
Johnson faced Jones on 5th June 1999, and this could be viewed as being for the vacant world championship. Any fight for the championship had to include Jones, who was an outstanding talent.
Ring Magazine is also another one who traces it through Jones
Well I must admit I like the starting point, simply denying the 168 division (my personal least favorite) exists in the first place! :)
But it really is an odd way to begin isn't it? I also got a kick out of the complaints about Darius (which are fair enough) and then justifies it because Jones fights...Lou Del Valle? :) Hadn't Lou lost to Virgil previously? Doesn't that render the rest of their argument regarding Hearns and Barkley etc kinda tough to support? Reggie Johnson was a good fighter, but HE's in the ring to determine the lineal champ? based on what?
Yeah Ring just got sick of Darius and said screw it and named Jones the guy after he beat Gonzales and Harmon.
I may just be outvoted here. The classy thing to do at this point would probably be to concede defeat.
Me? I'm gonna hold my breath and stomp my foot and see if that changes Ring Magazine and Boxing Illustrated's mind.
Got a question for you. Why Hill-Maske? Why pick up the lineal line with them? They certainly weren't the 2 best fighters in the division. So why? Is it because they each held a title? That can't be the case. You been pretty much dismissing titles (which I don't blame you) in every discussion. Going by that would be a contradiction. So I'm curious as to why start with Hill-Maske
Actually when they fought they were #'s 1 and 2 according to Ring Magazine IIRC. Maske had taken out Graciano, the Blade, Prince Charles and Virgil had beaten Tiozzo, Tate and Del Valle. The case isn't remotely ironclad, but it's a reasonable one in my view. It is also reasonable to say the title remained vacant until a later date. It becomes unclear to me then when a new line would begin that had a better case.
However silly the alphabets are, they generally help in pointing out the best fighters in a particular divison, and certainly seem to play a role in helping to define a new linage.
Would this linage had been considered had there been no title unification on the line? Would it have been considered had Hill not already beaten the current WBC champion Tiozzo?
Seems to me the WBA, IBF and WBC titles strongly influenced the creation of a new MAN.
