Top 5 of USA, Mexico, Philippines, and Puerto Rico

[Gallegos Boxing Gym]

Those are good points.

I still think Zarate was the better bantamweight champion.

Look at Rodolfo Martinez' body of work before Zarate blasted him out. He ruined fighters whose subsequent lack of success was related to the beating Zarate gave them. For 3 years he reigned dominantly and violently until they robbed him against Pintor and he left the sport. I think you can say Olivares' opponents at the top of his list are a slightly deeper group, but Zarate usurps that a bit with his utter dominance.

Not to imply Olivares wasn't dominant. Or violent. But he reigned for only a year before getting stopped by Chucho. He won the return and a year later was stopped again by Herrera, ending his days at 118. That's a pretty unfair characterization of Olivares' reign, but I'm just pointing out that his dominance over his peers was not as pronounced as Zarate's. And no one will say the late-70's was a weak era at 118.

So what's more important, a few more good fighters on your "good wins" list or clearer dominance? It's a matter of personal tastes, but I can't get around the fact that Zarate was as dominant a force at 118 that I ever saw in my limited time on this planet. You certainly make a good case, but I'm gonna go with Zarate.

[Gallegos Boxing Gym]

But if you think Olivares' work outside the bantamweight division was compelling nough to nose him ahead of Zarate in an all-time sense, I can definitely see that.

[marbleheadmaui]

But if you think Olivares' work outside the bantamweight division was compelling nough to nose him ahead of Zarate in an all-time sense, I can definitely see that.

I hadn't watched the Zarate-Rodolfo Martinez fight in in maybe 30 years. Very high quality fight. Little clinching, short punches, good movement, complex punching choices etc. The things that jumped out at me were (in no order)

Did Cuyo Harnandez EVER train a fighter who didn't have a magnificent left hand? Jab, hook to the body, hook to the head, uppercut?

I had forgotten just how physically strong Carlos was. When he didn't like Rodolfo's distance? He simply shoved him (like George Foreman did) and boom! Three feet of distance.

Zarate was also pretty damned ring savvy. The first time Martinez turns southpaw he lands a sweeping left hand. When he tries it again in the fifth round Zarate lands a booming left hook, batters him all over the ring and puts him through the ropes. When Rodlfo makes his final, gallant stand in the eighth Zarate recognizes it for what it is, weather's the storm, digs repeatedly to the body and lets the strom dissipate.

Finally, Zarate had every punch in the book. What he didn't have was a pattern of combinations. Matinez never knew what the NEXT punch was going to be. Carlos could throw any combo he wanted. The KO shots, left to the belly and a right uppercut may have been the first time he threw that all night. Before a left to the belly either ended a combination or was followed by a straight right hand or a hook to the head.

Marvelous!

[Gallegos Boxing Gym]

Marblehead, that was a great breakdown of the Zarate-Martinez fight. And I apreciate the nudge in the right direction with Olivares. I might have to dump poor Miguel Canto from the top 5. Mexico is TOUGH. It has a cross-section of all the different pillars of greatness upon which fighters can be deemed great: fast and furious reigns of destruction, longer reigns where champs face less-demanding comp (with a few nuggets sprinkled in as well) while building great records, young greats dying young, fighters whose stars shine brighter than their resumes might, etc.

It's a challenge. And a top 5 is a one way of leaving Barrera, Morales, and Marquez off the list. As history shakes it all out, it's gonna be hard ranking those guys accordingly. I can seemingly make a case for each guy. A top 10 would be brutal. Thank you for insight.

[marbleheadmaui]

Marblehead, that was a great breakdown of the Zarate-Martinez fight. And I apreciate the nudge in the right direction with Olivares. I might have to dump poor Miguel Canto from the top 5. Mexico is TOUGH. It has a cross-section of all the different pillars of greatness upon which fighters can be deemed great: fast and furious reigns of destruction, longer reigns where champs face less-demanding comp (with a few nuggets sprinkled in as well) while building great records, young greats dying young, fighters whose stars shine brighter than their resumes might, etc.

It's a challenge. And a top 5 is a one way of leaving Barrera, Morales, and Marquez off the list. As history shakes it all out, it's gonna be hard ranking those guys accordingly. I can seemingly make a case for each guy. A top 10 would be brutal. Thank you for insight.

As you rightly note, criteria is everything in trying to figure these things out. For me? Extended title reigns (and I mean REAL title reigns, not some Orlando Canizales defending a strap 15+ times against largely unranked guys) are very powerful. Canto's 15 or so defenses as THE MAN at 112 is very powerful. though only perhaps 10 of those were high quality defenses.

You know who falls out for me [gritting teeth]? The guy who, had he lived might have ended up the concensus number one, Chava Sanchez. Yes he beat HOFers on four occasions as well as Castillo and LaPorte and Castanon. He is the finest feather I have seen in my lifetime in terms of who I think would win a round robin of the guys I've seen. But he just died too young to have the overall body of work of the other guys.

You, of course raise the central point with regard to Mexico. I could make credible cases for JCC, Olivares, Canto, Sanchez, Lopez, Zarate, Sadlivar, Morales, MAB, both Marquez brothers, Kid Azteca, Baby Arizmendi, Chuiquita Gonzales and maybe even Pipino Cuevas and Daniel Zaragoza being in the top ten. That's 16 guys! You pick the criteria and I'll tell you who the top ten are. Trying to get to five? Impossible!

[generalbulldog]

Marblehead, that was a great breakdown of the Zarate-Martinez fight. And I apreciate the nudge in the right direction with Olivares. I might have to dump poor Miguel Canto from the top 5. Mexico is TOUGH. It has a cross-section of all the different pillars of greatness upon which fighters can be deemed great: fast and furious reigns of destruction, longer reigns where champs face less-demanding comp (with a few nuggets sprinkled in as well) while building great records, young greats dying young, fighters whose stars shine brighter than their resumes might, etc.

It's a challenge. And a top 5 is a one way of leaving Barrera, Morales, and Marquez off the list. As history shakes it all out, it's gonna be hard ranking those guys accordingly. I can seemingly make a case for each guy. A top 10 would be brutal. Thank you for insight.

As you rightly note, criteria is everything in trying to figure these things out. For me? Extended title reigns (and I mean REAL title reigns, not some Orlando Canizales defending a strap 15+ times against largely unranked guys) are very powerful. Canto's 15 or so defenses as THE MAN at 112 is very powerful. though only perhaps 10 of those were high quality defenses.

You know who falls out for me [gritting teeth]? The guy who, had he lived might have ended up the concensus number one, Chava Sanchez. Yes he beat HOFers on four occasions as well as Castillo and LaPorte and Castanon. He is the finest feather I have seen in my lifetime in terms of who I think would win a round robin of the guys I've seen. But he just died too young to have the overall body of work of the other guys.

You, of course raise the central point with regard to Mexico. I could make credible cases for JCC, Olivares, Canto, Sanchez, Lopez, Zarate, Sadlivar, Morales, MAB, both Marquez brothers, Kid Azteca, Baby Arizmendi, Chuiquita Gonzales and maybe even Pipino Cuevas and Daniel Zaragoza being in the top ten. That's 16 guys! You pick the criteria and I'll tell you who the top ten are. Trying to get to five? Impossible!

Since you just mentioned Sanchez. I would like to point this out. I remember in the other thread where you said Roy Jones beating Hopkins was not impressive at all, whereas everyone has given Sanchez and I think maybe you would too although you haven't stated for beating hall of famers like let's say Azumah Nelson that was still very green at that part of his career, even more so than Bernard?

I would just like a clarification. Wouldn't the same standard hold for Sanchez for beating guys like Nelson who was still pretty much green? And Nelson wasn't even ranked. The same argument you used that Hopkins was not a great victory for Jones (even though he was ranked top 10 when he fought Jones).

[marbleheadmaui]

Marblehead, that was a great breakdown of the Zarate-Martinez fight. And I apreciate the nudge in the right direction with Olivares. I might have to dump poor Miguel Canto from the top 5. Mexico is TOUGH. It has a cross-section of all the different pillars of greatness upon which fighters can be deemed great: fast and furious reigns of destruction, longer reigns where champs face less-demanding comp (with a few nuggets sprinkled in as well) while building great records, young greats dying young, fighters whose stars shine brighter than their resumes might, etc.

It's a challenge. And a top 5 is a one way of leaving Barrera, Morales, and Marquez off the list. As history shakes it all out, it's gonna be hard ranking those guys accordingly. I can seemingly make a case for each guy. A top 10 would be brutal. Thank you for insight.

As you rightly note, criteria is everything in trying to figure these things out. For me? Extended title reigns (and I mean REAL title reigns, not some Orlando Canizales defending a strap 15+ times against largely unranked guys) are very powerful. Canto's 15 or so defenses as THE MAN at 112 is very powerful. though only perhaps 10 of those were high quality defenses.

You know who falls out for me [gritting teeth]? The guy who, had he lived might have ended up the concensus number one, Chava Sanchez. Yes he beat HOFers on four occasions as well as Castillo and LaPorte and Castanon. He is the finest feather I have seen in my lifetime in terms of who I think would win a round robin of the guys I've seen. But he just died too young to have the overall body of work of the other guys.

You, of course raise the central point with regard to Mexico. I could make credible cases for JCC, Olivares, Canto, Sanchez, Lopez, Zarate, Sadlivar, Morales, MAB, both Marquez brothers, Kid Azteca, Baby Arizmendi, Chuiquita Gonzales and maybe even Pipino Cuevas and Daniel Zaragoza being in the top ten. That's 16 guys! You pick the criteria and I'll tell you who the top ten are. Trying to get to five? Impossible!

Since you just mentioned Sanchez. I would like to point this out. I remember in the other thread where you said Roy Jones beating Hopkins was not impressive at all, whereas everyone has given Sanchez and I think maybe you would too although you haven't stated for beating hall of famers like let's say Azumah Nelson that was still very green at that part of his career, even more so than Bernard?

I would just like a clarification. Wouldn't the same standard hold for Sanchez for beating guys like Nelson who was still pretty much green? And Nelson wasn't even ranked. The same argument you used that Hopkins was not a great victory for Jones (even though he was).

[sigh]

I am as guilty as anyone of giving Sanchez the benefit of the doubt on many things, including Azumah, because, well, he died on a midnight pussy run at 23! So a lot of us, me included, look at him and say look at the names around him when he died available for fights. Rematches with Azumah, Bazooka and LaPorte, Pedroza, Lockridge and up at 130 Camacho, Chacon, Navarette and Boza Edwards. So I illogically and unfairly say "well he would have beaten at least SOME of those guys" so rewarding him for Azumah is perhaps just.

Now to be clear on the Roy-BHOP debate. What was at issue in THAT discussion was NOT whether it was a great win. In hindsight it is Jones second most important. The issue was could one reasonably call Jones 160 champion based on that fight. My answer remains NO! One doesn't become a legit champ by beating the #9 ranked guy.

I once did an alternate career for Sanchez had he lived? And interestingly I had his first defeat (going forward) being in a rematch with Azumah two years after they'd first fought.

Is that enough of an answer?

[marbleheadmaui]

Those are good points.

I still think Zarate was the better bantamweight champion.

Look at Rodolfo Martinez' body of work before Zarate blasted him out. He ruined fighters whose subsequent lack of success was related to the beating Zarate gave them. For 3 years he reigned dominantly and violently until they robbed him against Pintor and he left the sport. I think you can say Olivares' opponents at the top of his list are a slightly deeper group, but Zarate usurps that a bit with his utter dominance.

Not to imply Olivares wasn't dominant. Or violent. But he reigned for only a year before getting stopped by Chucho. He won the return and a year later was stopped again by Herrera, ending his days at 118. That's a pretty unfair characterization of Olivares' reign, but I'm just pointing out that his dominance over his peers was not as pronounced as Zarate's. And no one will say the late-70's was a weak era at 118.

So what's more important, a few more good fighters on your "good wins" list or clearer dominance? It's a matter of personal tastes, but I can't get around the fact that Zarate was as dominant a force at 118 that I ever saw in my limited time on this planet. You certainly make a good case, but I'm gonna go with Zarate.

That was one whale of a post! It is awfully hard to argue with much of it. As much as I loved Puas, few men in history ever left quite as much wreckage in their wake as Zarate did. Now I'm gonna go watch the Zarate-Martinez fight again!

The one argument I will make is while the Zarate era was a formidable one? The Cuevas era was as tough at the top and deeper. I'm not arguing Zrate doesn't belong in the top five, only that Puas does as well.

You've made a great case regarding the bantam comparison! I learned a couple oif things, thanks!