Praising some often overlooked/forgotten fighters

So about 3 years ago I thought to myself I know a lot about Arguello, Lopez, Monzon, Emile, JCC, SRL, Hearns, Hagler, Ali, Louis etc. etc. etc. (Most of the standard names that get talked about)
So I said why not put those names aside and look into learning more about other fighters that have always sparked an interest to me. Fighters whom I often ask myself why doesn't anyone comment on them? I've tried over those years to throw the names into the mix but hardly get a look. Maybe a comment here and there and it's usually Spicoli, THIRDMAN and eagle (haven't seen him post in a while ???) Anyway...
I've been able to get my hands on several fights for each guy over time and have been learning more and more. Looked up some videos to post... I'll be posting more as I have a couple of more names I want to add to this thread.

I want to give the boxers some exposure for a couple reasons.

1. I don't think these guys get the credit they deserve
2. Hopefully watching them, this will catch the interest of one or two of you who do not know much about them and will be interested in learning more on them.


Hilario "La Bujia" Zapata (Nickname: The Spark Plug because he had a skinny body with a big head)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SPkh4t1XU30


Myung-Woo "Sonagi" Yuh (Nickname: Rain Shower because his attacks were quick but fierce)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Cbr6ll05JA


Jose "Mantequilla" Napoles (Nickname: Butter because he was as smooth as butter when he fought)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GR-kuFNSXrA


Eusebio "El Alacran" Pedroza (Nickame: The Scorpion because of his sharp instinct to attack)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v2vkzUD51ZY

Niiiice.

I really wish Sonagi and the Korean Hawk had hashed things out. I suspect Chang would have been a heavy favorite, but who knows? I suspect now that Chang is in the Hall Yuh goes in at some point.

Zapata was fun to watch and seemd to want to be a mini Ismael Laguna. Not a bad thing.

Napoles was just shake your head great. No and ifs or buts. Just a flat out ATG. I mean how many guys are top contenders at one weight, can't get a title crack, so they move to a sceond weight, can't get one there either and then move to a third and become absolutely dominant? And God was he pretty to watch. I mean he schooled Curtis Cokes and Emile Griffith, and I mean schooled them, in back to back fights.

In my lifetime I cannot think of a fighter to whom the rules meant less than Eusabio Pedroza. A hard, hard man. You were gonna fight El Alacran? You'd better be ready for anything and be ready to go all night long. The guy who fixed the featherweights after Sanchez died.

Great post!

Jose Napoles was one of those guys I came across after studying someone else (Monzon) and yes, he was absolutely amazing! Clearly (and sadly) far too small to be in the ring with a monstor (;D) like Monzon.

Don't know too much about Pedroza and nothing about the other guys... I hate you Mick, I'm just so fucking waterlogged with boxing right now :-X ;D

Napoles was an excellent fighter. He doesn't quite class as an ATG for me. I don't think Griffith had any business at 147 by the time of their fight & looked drained in the footage I've seen. Still, he had a very solid time as Welterweight champ, the defeat to Backus which he avenged aside. I'd forgotten about the Stracey win actually, that's another massive upset win for a Brit that I overlooked in another thread.

I've only seen two fights of Zapata's, one a highlights bit where he knocked out some Hispanic bloke & when Chang beat him down. Looked a good fighter, but nothing that special, although I stand to be corrected.

Don't know anything about Yuh, but he looks pretty good.

Pedroza I do know about, he was a real beast imo. The shame is his name is best known, certainly over here, for being the guy who McGuigan beat, ignoring his fights with Olivares & Lockridge. If ever there was a guy to watch to learn how to use your head movement & jab to get to the inside it's him imo.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JazMerkin

Napoles was an excellent fighter. He doesn't quite class as an ATG for me. I don't think Griffith had any business at 147 by the time of their fight & looked drained in the footage I've seen. Still, he had a very solid time as Welterweight champ, the defeat to Backus which he avenged aside. I'd forgotten about the Stracey win actually, that's another massive upset win for a Brit that I overlooked in another thread.

I've only seen two fights of Zapata's, one a highlights bit where he knocked out some Hispanic bloke & when Chang beat him down. Looked a good fighter, but nothing that special, although I stand to be corrected.

Don't know anything about Yuh, but he looks pretty good.

Pedroza I do know about, he was a real beast imo. The shame is his name is best known, certainly over here, for being the guy who McGuigan beat, ignoring his fights with Olivares & Lockridge. If ever there was a guy to watch to learn how to use your head movement & jab to get to the inside it's him imo.

---

I'm not sure how manyn welters you could place ahead of Napoles. 6-7 maybe? Robinson, Leonard, Armstrong, Babrbados Walcott, Ross and who else? I mean isn't Napoles as accomplished as Griffith or Hearns or Gavilan?

Zapata I'd argue was VERY good and you're dead on about Pedroza.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by marbleheadmaui

Niiiice.
I really wish Sonagi and the Korean Hawk had hashed things out. I suspect Chang would have been a heavy favorite, but who knows? I suspect now that Chang is in the Hall Yuh goes in at some point.

---

Truthfully I think I would favor Yuh just slightly.
I think his speed and countering would prevail.
Changs opposition has more depth I agree, but I'm going by styles.
Chang was an inside fighter that would tend to get wild a bit and I think Yuh would catch him constantly with the hooks and sharp right.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by marbleheadmaui

Zapata was fun to watch and seemd to want to be a mini Ismael Laguna. Not a bad thing.

---

I hold Zapata highly and praise him because I think he faced the best possible opponents around. Win, lose or draw. Champs, former champs and top contenders.
Names like German Torres, Jung Koo Chang, Joey Olivo, Santos Laciar, Dodie Penalosa and Fidel Bassa (which I had Zapata wining the 2nd fight I still don't know how 1 judge had it for Fidel) also opponents like Juan Guzman, Alfonso Lopez, Freddy Castillo, Netrnoi VorasingSomething... lol and Harold Petty.
I think his defense was really good when he was on. I've read things about him not taking his gym time too serious and partially training. Quoted as having said things like "Im still fresh on the legs from the previous fight".
All in all it just boils down to how much a person has seen of him.
I think he's on the low end of my ATG list. Yes, I consider him ATG.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by marbleheadmaui

Napoles was just shake your head great. No and ifs or buts. Just a flat out ATG. I mean how many guys are top contenders at one weight, can't get a title crack, so they move to a sceond weight, can't get one there either and then move to a third and become absolutely dominant? And God was he pretty to watch. I mean he schooled Curtis Cokes and Emile Griffith, and I mean schooled them, in back to back fights.

---

Couldn't agree more def. an ATG in my books... Wild shot in the dark here but somewhere around top 20 with a tolerance of +/- 5 :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by marbleheadmaui

In my lifetime I cannot think of a fighter to whom the rules meant less than Eusabio Pedroza. A hard, hard man. You were gonna fight El Alacran? You'd better be ready for anything and be ready to go all night long. The guy who fixed the featherweights after Sanchez died.
Great post!

---

Yeah you can say Eusebio was a little dirty... But not more than Saddler was. ;)
Eusebio was brilliant and has one of the best title reigns in boxing ever.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jimanuel Boogustus

Jose Napoles was one of those guys I came across after studying someone else (Monzon) and yes, he was absolutely amazing! Clearly (and sadly) far too small to be in the ring with a monstor (;D) like Monzon.

Don't know too much about Pedroza and nothing about the other guys... I hate you Mick, I'm just so fucking waterlogged with boxing right now :-X ;D

---

Monzon was a monstor! :D
Napoles was a special kind of fighter and just think would he had not defected from Cuba once Fidel banned boxing we would have missed out on his greatness.
I recommend you at least watch the videos I posted on Pedroza, Zapata and Yuh if nothing else. You'll at least get a gimplse of them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JazMerkin

Napoles was an excellent fighter. He doesn't quite class as an ATG for me. I don't think Griffith had any business at 147 by the time of their fight & looked drained in the footage I've seen. Still, he had a very solid time as Welterweight champ, the defeat to Backus which he avenged aside. I'd forgotten about the Stracey win actually, that's another massive upset win for a Brit that I overlooked in another thread.

---

I can respect your opinion but I don't agree with it.
As I said above for my likings Napoles is somewhere in the top 20 +/- 5 spots. (Shot in the dark)
He not only has outstanding wins he has outstanding performances. Beat HoF fighters and top opposition. While agree Emile was no longer at his best when he lost to Napoles let's keep in mind Emile went on to beat some meaningful opponents like Dick Tiger, Ernie Lopez, Manuel Gonzalez, Bennie Briscoe and dropped a decision to Monzon.
Napoles should have put his pride aside and should have retired after the Muniz debacle.
Something else to keep in mind 3 of his loses were bouts that were stopped due to cuts.
Which was Napoles biggest weakness that he cut up around the eyes since early in his career. I guess it's just a matter of what you look for.

The other post was massive... ;D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JazMerkin

I've only seen two fights of Zapata's, one a highlights bit where he knocked out some Hispanic bloke & when Chang beat him down. Looked a good fighter, but nothing that special, although I stand to be corrected.

---

Like I said above for me, he's a great to me that and I def. consider him an ATG.
Have you seen him beat the likes of German Torres? One of his best performances. Not sure if you know this but he beat Chang in their 1st bout.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JazMerkin

Don't know anything about Yuh, but he looks pretty good.

---

Yuh I've come to learn had deadly speed and precise punching.
Great range from a distance and boy did he love working the body.
I saw him floor one of his opponents with the hooks downstairs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JazMerkin

Pedroza I do know about, he was a real beast imo. The shame is his name is best known, certainly over here, for being the guy who McGuigan beat, ignoring his fights with Olivares & Lockridge. If ever there was a guy to watch to learn how to use your head movement & jab to get to the inside it's him imo.

---

It would really suck if he is best known for that... :(
I mean he fought the likes of Alfonso Zamora, Royal Kobayashi, Ruben Olivares, Patrick Ford, Juan LaPorte, Bernard Taylor, Rocky Lockridge, Jorge Lujan and Barry.
So much more to him than that one fight.

Good thread CMM.


Benny Leonard
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MbDMaV8wIyk&NR=1



Carmen BAscillo


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E6qFddgcWCU&feature=related

this utube vid links you to some great old fights around the same page.

Good footage here. Famous fight.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6lkUKM9ay4c&feature=related

Looks to me like Tunney was waiting it out and could of got up whenever he liked.

Nice one Andre!

I like watching Tunney fight, always looks like the future fighting the past.

Gene Tunney often gets spoken of as one of the first to bring a more modern fighting style to boxing, more shoulder on, throwing 1-2's etc... I never hear anyone disputing it, but I often wonder if this idea of Tunney being ahead of his time is just historical revisionism?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Andre

Good footage here. Famous fight.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6lkUKM9ay4c&feature=related

Looks to me like Tunney was waiting it out and could of got up whenever he liked.

---

I agree, the count starts, when the ref starts it, and if Tunney had wanted to he could have got up earlier. Once Tunney does get up he doesn't appear to wobble or be shaky, no controversy there, much to do about nothing. Plus, Dempsey fucks himself by not going to a neutral corner.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jimanuel Boogustus

Nice one Andre!

I like watching Tunney fight, always looks like the future fighting the past.

Gene Tunney often gets spoken of as one of the first to bring a more modern fighting style to boxing, more shoulder on, throwing 1-2's etc... I never hear anyone disputing it, but I often wonder if this idea of Tunney being ahead of his time is just historical revisionism?

---

Hard to say, but that jab is doubling up at times, its whip like fast and it looks like the controlling factor.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1LzjNlBI60g&feature=related

:cool:

Good footage here, clear as a bell :p.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JmG1vcaH3yY

I was watching EZ Charles in this; but wow Marciarno was real head hunter!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jimanuel Boogustus

Nice one Andre!

I like watching Tunney fight, always looks like the future fighting the past.

Gene Tunney often gets spoken of as one of the first to bring a more modern fighting style to boxing, more shoulder on, throwing 1-2's etc... I never hear anyone disputing it, but I often wonder if this idea of Tunney being ahead of his time is just historical revisionism?

---

I think the argument might apply to Tunney as a heavyyweight. But not overall. The techniques used by the heavyweights changed dramtically from about 1915 to about 1925. The heavies had never seen a mobile, heavy handed, all action guy like Dempsey until Dempsey and they'd never seen a modern technical master like Tunney until Tunney. BUT!

George Dixon and Joe Gans, especially Gans, were the earlier boxing revolutions in terms of technique. Watch Gans really closely and he does everyhting you see today. The pacing is COMPLETELY different because of the 20-40 round fight lengths. But when Gans moves or punches or defends? He's the first guy I've found who looks the way guys did from say 1930 on to today.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CutMeMick

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by marbleheadmaui

Niiiice.
I really wish Sonagi and the Korean Hawk had hashed things out. I suspect Chang would have been a heavy favorite, but who knows? I suspect now that Chang is in the Hall Yuh goes in at some point.

---

Truthfully I think I would favor Yuh just slightly.
I think his speed and countering would prevail.
Changs opposition has more depth I agree, but I'm going by styles.
Chang was an inside fighter that would tend to get wild a bit and I think Yuh would catch him constantly with the hooks and sharp right.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by marbleheadmaui

Zapata was fun to watch and seemd to want to be a mini Ismael Laguna. Not a bad thing.

---

I hold Zapata highly and praise him because I think he faced the best possible opponents around. Win, lose or draw. Champs, former champs and top contenders.
Names like German Torres, Jung Koo Chang, Joey Olivo, Santos Laciar, Dodie Penalosa and Fidel Bassa (which I had Zapata wining the 2nd fight I still don't know how 1 judge had it for Fidel) also opponents like Juan Guzman, Alfonso Lopez, Freddy Castillo, Netrnoi VorasingSomething... lol and Harold Petty.
I think his defense was really good when he was on. I've read things about him not taking his gym time too serious and partially training. Quoted as having said things like "Im still fresh on the legs from the previous fight".
All in all it just boils down to how much a person has seen of him.
I think he's on the low end of my ATG list. Yes, I consider him ATG.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by marbleheadmaui

Napoles was just shake your head great. No and ifs or buts. Just a flat out ATG. I mean how many guys are top contenders at one weight, can't get a title crack, so they move to a sceond weight, can't get one there either and then move to a third and become absolutely dominant? And God was he pretty to watch. I mean he schooled Curtis Cokes and Emile Griffith, and I mean schooled them, in back to back fights.

---

Couldn't agree more def. an ATG in my books... Wild shot in the dark here but somewhere around top 20 with a tolerance of +/- 5 :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by marbleheadmaui

In my lifetime I cannot think of a fighter to whom the rules meant less than Eusabio Pedroza. A hard, hard man. You were gonna fight El Alacran? You'd better be ready for anything and be ready to go all night long. The guy who fixed the featherweights after Sanchez died.
Great post!

---

Yeah you can say Eusebio was a little dirty... But not more than Saddler was. ;)
Eusebio was brilliant and has one of the best title reigns in boxing ever.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jimanuel Boogustus

Jose Napoles was one of those guys I came across after studying someone else (Monzon) and yes, he was absolutely amazing! Clearly (and sadly) far too small to be in the ring with a monstor (;D) like Monzon.

Don't know too much about Pedroza and nothing about the other guys... I hate you Mick, I'm just so fucking waterlogged with boxing right now :-X ;D

---

Monzon was a monstor! :D
Napoles was a special kind of fighter and just think would he had not defected from Cuba once Fidel banned boxing we would have missed out on his greatness.
I recommend you at least watch the videos I posted on Pedroza, Zapata and Yuh if nothing else. You'll at least get a gimplse of them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JazMerkin

Napoles was an excellent fighter. He doesn't quite class as an ATG for me. I don't think Griffith had any business at 147 by the time of their fight & looked drained in the footage I've seen. Still, he had a very solid time as Welterweight champ, the defeat to Backus which he avenged aside. I'd forgotten about the Stracey win actually, that's another massive upset win for a Brit that I overlooked in another thread.

---

I can respect your opinion but I don't agree with it.
As I said above for my likings Napoles is somewhere in the top 20 +/- 5 spots. (Shot in the dark)
He not only has outstanding wins he has outstanding performances. Beat HoF fighters and top opposition. While agree Emile was no longer at his best when he lost to Napoles let's keep in mind Emile went on to beat some meaningful opponents like Dick Tiger, Ernie Lopez, Manuel Gonzalez, Bennie Briscoe and dropped a decision to Monzon.
Napoles should have put his pride aside and should have retired after the Muniz debacle.
Something else to keep in mind 3 of his loses were bouts that were stopped due to cuts.
Which was Napoles biggest weakness that he cut up around the eyes since early in his career. I guess it's just a matter of what you look for.

---

1) Well Yuh was the boxer and Chang the banger so you could be right.
2) Good thoughts on Zapata. Can't get him as an ATG. I think he's a marginal HOF level guy.
3) I've got Napoles not quite that high, but whatever my ist of ATG's is he's on it.
4) LOL, NOBODY was dirtier than Sandy Saddler :)

On the rest of your conversation Napoles' other great vulnerability was his lifestyle. A Party animal's party animal.

Has anyone else noticed the similarities between Napoles and a prime Mosley? No doubt in my mind Napoles is an ATG, i also rate Carlos Ortiz who had a trilogy with Ismael Laguna 2-1 and fought Flash Elorde, Sugar Ramos twice for KO wins and a controversial draw with clever Jr Welter King Niccolino Locche. Ortiz is an under rated Lightweight champion.

Mickey Walker (Now there is a movie waiting to be made?)
Bob Foster (I don't think he really gets the recognition he deserves, i believe he would've KO'd RJJ)

Wilfred Benitez: We should all not forget what a class act this guy was in the ring.

Naploes actually kinda reminds me of Augustus :D