Quote Originally Posted by IamInuit View Post
@TitoFan

Great topic and worthy of exploration. I always or at least try to approach resumes with caution but there are times when its pretty clear cut. Take the Moyer brothers for example. They have lots of loses but they fought everyone, anywhere and at times with a days notice. Gans finishes a fight and then jumps on a train to fight Langford the next evening. I think the main culprit surrounding this issue is the market. Only a few tv dates a year and you get one loss today and the chances of becoming a bankable prize fighter starts to diminish. Way to much emphasis on a loss today in my view.

Ray Leonards resume is a standout because he did not waste his better years fighting schleps and actually wanted a real legacy and he's got one. He would have never entertained fighting today's version of Roy Jones just to have his name on his resume.

And how about your countryman Wilfredo. Turned pro at 15 and then went on a 25 fight winning streak which he accomplished in just over a year and ending with a title shot at 17.

To me in many ways boxing has become somewhat of a reflection of the coddled world we live in. I mean last summer I saw children playing in a sandbox wearing helmets.

I don't really buy the notion that these people a babied because they have no amateur experience. Zarate only had about 30 amateur fights and most Mexican fighters have little or no experience in the amateurs. The same can be said about most Latin American countries as kids turn pro at age 15 and in many cases out of necessity.

Lopez had fewer then 20 and so did Duran

Qawi None
Moore None
Conn None
Manny None
Marciano None
Toney about 30
Foreman just over 20 I think

Good stuff Tfan


Although it's not written in stone, I believe there is a "typical" career path for a world class fighter. Your first 20 or so fights are against comparable, not-well-known opposition... as part of your learning curve. After that, one should begin to see a gradual, but steady improvement in the degree of opposition. If a fighter gets to 40 fights and is still fighting handpicked bums, or guys making their own pro debuts.... something's wrong.

Cotto fought some tough opposition beginning from before his 20th fight. After that, it was a steady stream of world-class fighters. You mentioned Wilfred Benitez getting a title shot at 17. That was against the famous Kid Pambelé, in Wilfred's 26th pro fight. The great Roberto Duran... he fought the tough Hiroshi Kubayashi in his 26th professional fight, took the title from Ken Buchanan (WBA lightweight) 3 fights later..... and proceeded to fight a veritable "Who's Who" of boxing from there on out.

I looked at Zarate's record, and found it to be lacking in quality of opposition until he fought Alberto Zamora. But by that time Carlos had had 40-some fights. Not criticizing the great Zarate... but IMO he was brought along rather slowly.

That's why I maintain it's not just the numbers on the Win-Loss columns. It's how you're brought along, and who you face on your way up. I've even mentioned Wilfredo Vazquez Jr. Only 20-some fights, and already has faced world-class opposition. Yes, he lost to both Arce and Donaire. But both fights were competitive, and he was actually up on Arce when he got knocked out late in the fight.

Felix Trinidad, my favorite fighter, won the IBF welterweight title against Maurice Blocker in his 20th pro fight. And then proceeded to end a few unbeaten records along the line. Even Oscar de la Hoya, a fighter I was never much a fan of, was fighting very credible opposition by his 20th pro fight.

Bottom line is that the padding of records is one of those things I find deplorable in boxing today. Too much emphasis on undefeated records, I think. And I agree with you... it's typical of the coddled society we live in today. I don't remember so much cherry-picking before.