At the risk of boxing blasphemy

[Kev]

Like I say folks I'm not discrediting I openly admit I know nothing about him, but he's one of those names that seems to be almost hallowed in that nobody will ever criticise his resume or anything about him ever.

Yet if you mention Joe Calzaghe for example, who also totally dominated his weight class, never lost a fight, or even drew one, and beat two not only Hall of Famers but arguably two of the greatest of all time, people will literally leap to tell you why he is so overatted, has a padded record, should of lost to Hopkins and Reid, avoided the big names, had a poor defense, no punch, slaps etc etc.

So it's a fair question, is Calzaghe criticised so much more than Lopez because he was far inferior to Lopez or is it merely because if they are honest, nobody really knows much about Ricardo Lopez other than watching a few highlights or a couple of his major fights?

I mean with a guy like Calzaghe, virtually all of his opponents are well known to us, so we can criticise each of them in turn and point out why they were weak oppositon or old, or past their best, or had padded records themselves.

Whereas with Lopez I expect even Britkid has only heard of maybe a dozen opponents at best and most of them only in relation to fighting Lopez.

That's all I'm saying, was he really THAT good, or does fighting at an obscure weight, and the resulting lack of information and knowledge available to us as a result mean that his record and ability is simply not scrutinised as much?

He was on TV a decent amount over here in the 90s. Most of his competition was not well known, but that's simply because of the nature of the 105 lbers. His definately was THAT good, his skill in the ring and his power were phenomenal. He travelled around the world fighting whomever would step into the ring with him. I think a big reason that people liked him so much was because he was exciting, you knew he could pull out that eraser at any time, or he could simply outbox his opponents. Before you get on another holy than thou rant about him make an effort to watch some of his fights.

And for the record I give Calzaghe full credit for what he did. But the fact that give Lopez crap for only going up one division should apply to Calzaghe as well.

Believe me I do, Calzaghe isn't one of my greatest ever either.

And its hardly a holier than thou rant, I openly admited I don't know anything about him, just wondered what it is exactly that makes almost everyone pick him automatically as one of the best ever.

[killersheep]

Like I say folks I'm not discrediting I openly admit I know nothing about him, but he's one of those names that seems to be almost hallowed in that nobody will ever criticise his resume or anything about him ever.

Yet if you mention Joe Calzaghe for example, who also totally dominated his weight class, never lost a fight, or even drew one, and beat two not only Hall of Famers but arguably two of the greatest of all time, people will literally leap to tell you why he is so overatted, has a padded record, should of lost to Hopkins and Reid, avoided the big names, had a poor defense, no punch, slaps etc etc.

So it's a fair question, is Calzaghe criticised so much more than Lopez because he was far inferior to Lopez or is it merely because if they are honest, nobody really knows much about Ricardo Lopez other than watching a few highlights or a couple of his major fights?

I mean with a guy like Calzaghe, virtually all of his opponents are well known to us, so we can criticise each of them in turn and point out why they were weak oppositon or old, or past their best, or had padded records themselves.

Whereas with Lopez I expect even Britkid has only heard of maybe a dozen opponents at best and most of them only in relation to fighting Lopez.

That's all I'm saying, was he really THAT good, or does fighting at an obscure weight, and the resulting lack of information and knowledge available to us as a result mean that his record and ability is simply not scrutinised as much?

He was on TV a decent amount over here in the 90s. Most of his competition was not well known, but that's simply because of the nature of the 105 lbers. His definately was THAT good, his skill in the ring and his power were phenomenal. He travelled around the world fighting whomever would step into the ring with him. I think a big reason that people liked him so much was because he was exciting, you knew he could pull out that eraser at any time, or he could simply outbox his opponents. Before you get on another holy than thou rant about him make an effort to watch some of his fights.

And for the record I give Calzaghe full credit for what he did. But the fact that give Lopez crap for only going up one division should apply to Calzaghe as well.

Believe me I do, Calzaghe isn't one of my greatest ever either.

And its hardly a holier than thou rant, I openly admited I don't know anything about him, just wondered what it is exactly that makes almost everyone pick him automatically as one of the best ever.

Like who? You just have to throw in blanket statements on everything.
This is a completely pointless thread anyway, because are not willing to make an effort to watch him fight after clearly explained to you by those on this thread it was his SKILL and not his competition that made him great.

[Kev]

He was on TV a decent amount over here in the 90s. Most of his competition was not well known, but that's simply because of the nature of the 105 lbers. His definately was THAT good, his skill in the ring and his power were phenomenal. He travelled around the world fighting whomever would step into the ring with him. I think a big reason that people liked him so much was because he was exciting, you knew he could pull out that eraser at any time, or he could simply outbox his opponents. Before you get on another holy than thou rant about him make an effort to watch some of his fights.

And for the record I give Calzaghe full credit for what he did. But the fact that give Lopez crap for only going up one division should apply to Calzaghe as well.

Believe me I do, Calzaghe isn't one of my greatest ever either.

And its hardly a holier than thou rant, I openly admited I don't know anything about him, just wondered what it is exactly that makes almost everyone pick him automatically as one of the best ever.

Like who? You just have to throw in blanket statements on everything.
This is a completely pointless thread anyway, because are not willing to make an effort to watch him fight after clearly explained to you by those on this thread it was his SKILL and not his competition that made him great.

How is this a pointless thread? It's a valid question, I didn't say Lopezs was overated, I said from the very outset that I knew nothing about him and was asking the question.

For some reason this is a very tetchy subject for you which frankly is pretty bizarre because ANY and EVERY fighter fighting today can be and IS criticised constantly on here. Floyd Mayweather and Manny Pacquaio receive tons of criticism, so did Joe in his day, so does Wlad, so does Haye, Pavlik, Dawson, Cotto etc and I'm sure you've said criticised at least one of these on here before yourself.

Yet merely asking a question about Ricardo Lopez prompts you to say I'm holier than thou, on a rant, posting pointlessly etc?

Let me ask you, do you think if he was fighting right now, on Showtime regularly for example and was maybe fighting the likes of Calderon, Cazares etc do you reckon everyone would think he was the complete package and one of the best ever still, or do you think the fact that he's retired, and most of us, if we are honest, don't know a great deal about him means he's rated higher than he actually was?

Don't spit out your dummy, it's just a question is all.

I can't help but think of Christian Mijares, who was put into the p4p by the Ring, earmarked for greatness by many on this forum, but who was found out by a crude, unorthadox, ugly fighter with a big punch, and then lost again to a part timer who had been a pro for barely four years.

I'm just wondering whether if he'd have faced better competition Lopez may not have been equally found out, maybe against Carbajal maybe against somebody else.

It's just a thought, not an opinion, I don't know the answer, just daring to ask the question

[killersheep]

Believe me I do, Calzaghe isn't one of my greatest ever either.

And its hardly a holier than thou rant, I openly admited I don't know anything about him, just wondered what it is exactly that makes almost everyone pick him automatically as one of the best ever.

Like who? You just have to throw in blanket statements on everything.
This is a completely pointless thread anyway, because are not willing to make an effort to watch him fight after clearly explained to you by those on this thread it was his SKILL and not his competition that made him great.

How is this a pointless thread? It's a valid question, I didn't say Lopezs was overated, I said from the very outset that I knew nothing about him and was asking the question.

For some reason this is a very tetchy subject for you which frankly is pretty bizarre because ANY and EVERY fighter fighting today can be and IS criticised constantly on here. Floyd Mayweather and Manny Pacquaio receive tons of criticism, so did Joe in his day, so does Wlad, so does Haye, Pavlik, Dawson, Cotto etc and I'm sure you've said criticised at least one of these on here before yourself.

Yet merely asking a question about Ricardo Lopez prompts you to say I'm holier than thou, on a rant, posting pointlessly etc?

Let me ask you, do you think if he was fighting right now, on Showtime regularly for example and was maybe fighting the likes of Calderon, Cazares etc do you reckon everyone would think he was the complete package and one of the best ever still, or do you think the fact that he's retired, and most of us, if we are honest, don't know a great deal about him means he's rated higher than he actually was?

Don't spit out your dummy, it's just a question is all.

I can't help but think of Christian Mijares, who was put into the p4p by the Ring, earmarked for greatness by many on this forum, but who was found out by a crude, unorthadox, ugly fighter with a big punch, and then lost again to a part timer who had been a pro for barely four years.

I'm just wondering whether if he'd have faced better competition Lopez may not have been equally found out, maybe against Carbajal maybe against somebody else.

It's just a thought, not an opinion, I don't know the answer, just daring to ask the question

It's pointless, because even though your question has been answered by many of us on here that have seen many of his full fights (not on youtube mind you, on terrestrial television) and have explained you should go watch his fights to understand, you refuse to do so.

[Kev]

Like who? You just have to throw in blanket statements on everything.
This is a completely pointless thread anyway, because are not willing to make an effort to watch him fight after clearly explained to you by those on this thread it was his SKILL and not his competition that made him great.

How is this a pointless thread? It's a valid question, I didn't say Lopezs was overated, I said from the very outset that I knew nothing about him and was asking the question.

For some reason this is a very tetchy subject for you which frankly is pretty bizarre because ANY and EVERY fighter fighting today can be and IS criticised constantly on here. Floyd Mayweather and Manny Pacquaio receive tons of criticism, so did Joe in his day, so does Wlad, so does Haye, Pavlik, Dawson, Cotto etc and I'm sure you've said criticised at least one of these on here before yourself.

Yet merely asking a question about Ricardo Lopez prompts you to say I'm holier than thou, on a rant, posting pointlessly etc?

Let me ask you, do you think if he was fighting right now, on Showtime regularly for example and was maybe fighting the likes of Calderon, Cazares etc do you reckon everyone would think he was the complete package and one of the best ever still, or do you think the fact that he's retired, and most of us, if we are honest, don't know a great deal about him means he's rated higher than he actually was?

Don't spit out your dummy, it's just a question is all.

I can't help but think of Christian Mijares, who was put into the p4p by the Ring, earmarked for greatness by many on this forum, but who was found out by a crude, unorthadox, ugly fighter with a big punch, and then lost again to a part timer who had been a pro for barely four years.

I'm just wondering whether if he'd have faced better competition Lopez may not have been equally found out, maybe against Carbajal maybe against somebody else.

It's just a thought, not an opinion, I don't know the answer, just daring to ask the question

It's pointless, because even though your question has been answered by many of us on here that have seen many of his full fights (not on youtube mind you, on terrestrial television) and have explained you should go watch his fights to understand, you refuse to do so.

When did I say I refused to watch the fights? When was I told what fights to watch?

Since when is asking to someone to watch their fights the end of a discussion on Saddos?

Next time you say anything negative about a fighter, or even question him in anyway I'll respond with 'I told you to watch the fights but you won't' and see if whether that makes any sense to you either

Actually I am curious to check him out, which are the fights you'd recommend?

[killersheep]

How is this a pointless thread? It's a valid question, I didn't say Lopezs was overated, I said from the very outset that I knew nothing about him and was asking the question.

For some reason this is a very tetchy subject for you which frankly is pretty bizarre because ANY and EVERY fighter fighting today can be and IS criticised constantly on here. Floyd Mayweather and Manny Pacquaio receive tons of criticism, so did Joe in his day, so does Wlad, so does Haye, Pavlik, Dawson, Cotto etc and I'm sure you've said criticised at least one of these on here before yourself.

Yet merely asking a question about Ricardo Lopez prompts you to say I'm holier than thou, on a rant, posting pointlessly etc?

Let me ask you, do you think if he was fighting right now, on Showtime regularly for example and was maybe fighting the likes of Calderon, Cazares etc do you reckon everyone would think he was the complete package and one of the best ever still, or do you think the fact that he's retired, and most of us, if we are honest, don't know a great deal about him means he's rated higher than he actually was?

Don't spit out your dummy, it's just a question is all.

I can't help but think of Christian Mijares, who was put into the p4p by the Ring, earmarked for greatness by many on this forum, but who was found out by a crude, unorthadox, ugly fighter with a big punch, and then lost again to a part timer who had been a pro for barely four years.

I'm just wondering whether if he'd have faced better competition Lopez may not have been equally found out, maybe against Carbajal maybe against somebody else.

It's just a thought, not an opinion, I don't know the answer, just daring to ask the question

It's pointless, because even though your question has been answered by many of us on here that have seen many of his full fights (not on youtube mind you, on terrestrial television) and have explained you should go watch his fights to understand, you refuse to do so.

When did I say I refused to watch the fights? When was I told what fights to watch?

Since when is asking to someone to watch their fights the end of a discussion on Saddos?

Next time you say anything negative about a fighter, or even question him in anyway I'll respond with 'I told you to watch the fights but you won't' and see if whether that makes any sense to you either

Actually I am curious to check him out, which are the fights you'd recommend?

Both of his fights against Alvarez are a great fights, his KO of Lim is absolutely brutal, start with those.

[Kev]

It's pointless, because even though your question has been answered by many of us on here that have seen many of his full fights (not on youtube mind you, on terrestrial television) and have explained you should go watch his fights to understand, you refuse to do so.

When did I say I refused to watch the fights? When was I told what fights to watch?

Since when is asking to someone to watch their fights the end of a discussion on Saddos?

Next time you say anything negative about a fighter, or even question him in anyway I'll respond with 'I told you to watch the fights but you won't' and see if whether that makes any sense to you either

Actually I am curious to check him out, which are the fights you'd recommend?

Both of his fights against Alvarez are a great fights, his KO of Lim is absolutely brutal, start with those.

Will start looking for them tonight

[OumaFan]

I think underneath of all of this is a serious discussion about Lopez. About ranking people because of how good you think they are versus pure resume. Because he is WAY up there on some people's lists, light years past where he would be if you looked at pure resume. There are some obvious comparisons with Calzaghe whether or not Lopez was the smoother technician or not, did he ever fight anybody as good as a 44 year old Bernard Hopkins? Did he ever fight anybody as bad as an old Roy?

[generalbulldog]

Well to be fair, you can only fight the guys put in front of you. As someone said Lopez is an atg but would I rate him over let's say Floyd and Pacman? No because their level of opposition was much greater.

And maybe the hobbit has a point, eveyone on here calls Floyd a pussy for not taking on all comers and Manny a pussy for the catchweight, so if those 2 can be criticised as with all the other atgs than Ricardo Lopez isn't immune to speculation and criticism. What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

[Spicoli]

Ohh boy.Still with this ?Simply put.Exactly how many times have you watched...sat through and watched him fight??A fair and objective fight fan can watch Calzaghe fight numerous times as well and never run the risk of comparing,contrasting or confusing their respected skill sets.They were not only oceans but worlds apart in my honest opinion.

[Jody Lane]

Like I say folks I'm not discrediting I openly admit I know nothing about him, but he's one of those names that seems to be almost hallowed in that nobody will ever criticise his resume or anything about him ever.

Yet if you mention Joe Calzaghe for example, who also totally dominated his weight class, never lost a fight, or even drew one, and beat two not only Hall of Famers but arguably two of the greatest of all time, people will literally leap to tell you why he is so overatted, has a padded record, should of lost to Hopkins and Reid, avoided the big names, had a poor defense, no punch, slaps etc etc.

So it's a fair question, is Calzaghe criticised so much more than Lopez because he was far inferior to Lopez or is it merely because if they are honest, nobody really knows much about Ricardo Lopez other than watching a few highlights or a couple of his major fights?

I mean with a guy like Calzaghe, virtually all of his opponents are well known to us, so we can criticise each of them in turn and point out why they were weak oppositon or old, or past their best, or had padded records themselves.

Whereas with Lopez I expect even Britkid has only heard of maybe a dozen opponents at best and most of them only in relation to fighting Lopez.

That's all I'm saying, was he really THAT good, or does fighting at an obscure weight, and the resulting lack of information and knowledge available to us as a result mean that his record and ability is simply not scrutinised as much?

He was on TV a decent amount over here in the 90s. Most of his competition was not well known, but that's simply because of the nature of the 105 lbers. His definately was THAT good, his skill in the ring and his power were phenomenal. He travelled around the world fighting whomever would step into the ring with him. I think a big reason that people liked him so much was because he was exciting, you knew he could pull out that eraser at any time, or he could simply outbox his opponents. Before you get on another holy than thou rant about him make an effort to watch some of his fights.

And for the record I give Calzaghe full credit for what he did. But the fact that give Lopez crap for only going up one division should apply to Calzaghe as well.

Believe me I do, Calzaghe isn't one of my greatest ever either.

And its hardly a holier than thou rant, I openly admited I don't know anything about him, just wondered what it is exactly that makes almost everyone pick him automatically as one of the best ever.

Maybe it's because he had enough skill to win every one of his fights and enough sense to get out while on top??