Quote Originally Posted by JazMerkin View Post
I agree with Tszyu to a point (& what a shock to see The Third Man straight into defend ), however H, I think you're wrong about the wear & tear. The man had nearly 300 amateur fights, not to mention all those years of sparring, that all catches up, hence his shorter pro career. I think he had a good career, just not a great one. What is his defining win? Old Roger Mayweather & Julio Cesar Chavez? Zab Judah? Everyone tries to go on about guys 'ducking' him, but the fact is he was a win away from bouts with Oscar & Floyd & on both occasions blew the opportunity by losing to guys he shouldn't have (really shouldn't have in the case of Phillips). I think he had all the ingredients to be a great fighter especially looking at him as an amateur, but I think he falls slightly short for me.

My unpopular choice is going to be Aaron Pryor. An incredibly exciting fighter? Yes for sure. An ATG? Not for me. Don't get me wrong the Cervantes win is a good one, but in truth he'd seen better days & I think he was some way from the guy who beat up Locche & De Jesus as evidenced by some of his pedestrian defences of the title prior to that.

The Arguello wins were very impressive, but was he really a force at Light-Welter? I mean he'd come up some way already. They were great fights, but I've always found that this idea that everyone was ducking Pryor slightly laughable. Why didn't he force the issue & chase them like Duran did? If he wanted Leonard, Benitez or Duran, why didn't he give them no alternative but to face him? Or instead of taking a year between defences, why not go up & get into the mix with the likes of Starling & Curry? He's a guy who always gets mentioned as loving the glory, but to me he didn't really chase it.

I've clearly got a beef with Light-Welters

On those mentioned, I think saying Johnson & Louis is pure madness, if anything they don't get rated enough by people, although admittedly all great HWs get overrated in the greater scheme of boxing history. I also disagree with Jim on Dempsey, he had some nice things to his game & he was called the Manassa Mauler, he wasn't going to be the most technically astute, but he did provide a blueprint for many of the great infighters of the future so gets praise there from me.
Let me at least try to make a case on the Hawk. Wins over ATG's on three occasions (we'll come back to that) and he defeated five top five ranked guys (three of whome were the HOFers) and a total of six top ten ranked guys.

Cervantes was clearly long in the tooth. But he still had enough left in the tank to go on to beat Lennox Blackmoore who prior to losing to the Hawk was ranked number 2. So Cervantes wasn't shot. it was more of a passing of the torch thing like we see so often in the sport.

Alexis had been talked about as having been on the decline since the Jim Watt fight eighteen months before. But he kept winning, getting up against Ganigan to do so. There is no question he was reaching for the stars that night. There is also no question (in my mind anyway) Alexis Arguello was a GREAT, GREAT, GREAT fighter that night. Full credit to Pryor.

Your points on Duran and the rest are ENTIRELY Pryor's fault. The drugs got him VERY early and by the end of 1983 he was a shadow. He was presented with a contract for a $700k contract to fight Duran but because of the drugs, the paranoia that went with it and trouble with his team (gee I wonder why) he threw it away.

Now having said all that he beat as many great fighters, at at least a good a point in their careers, as Lennox Lewis or Larry Holmes or Mike Tyson or Roy Jones or Floyd Mayweather.

Pryor is one of those guys for the "You have to see him with your eyes" crew who in my view is a strong choice in the theoretical "who beats who at 140" games, but in terms of what we know isn't a top 50 and maybe not a top hundred kind of guy. And in my view it is all his own fault.

Anyway, that's the fanboy's case