Top 10 LATINO fighters in history!

[Xplosive]

Rank em(I'll give my list later).

[Valentino]

Originally posted by The Infamous:
Rank em(I'll give my list later). It is hard to come up with a top 10 list. And for that matter with an order...

The first five are, IMO (and in NOT particular order):

Duran, Joffre, Monzon, Arguello, Chavez


The remaining are, IMO, five of the following fighters listed below (and in Not particular order):


Ricardo Lopez, Sal Sanchez, Felix Trinidad, Mantequilla Napoles, Eusebio Pedroza, Luis Rodriguez, Oscar de la Hoya, Vicente Saldivar, Kid Gavilan, Kid Chocolate, Wilfredo Gomez, Carlos Ortiz, Miguel Canto, Ernesto Marcel, Wilfred Benitez, Carlos Zarate, and the amateur Teofilo Stevenson.

[mex fighter]

my unofficial list:

1 jorge luis gonzalez :D

2. sal sanchez/dlh

3 finito lopez

4. who cares

[dmille]

1) Eder Jofre
2) Carlos Monzon
3) Roberto Duran
4) Pascual Perez
5) Manuel Ortiz
6) Miguel Canto
7) Panama Al Brown
8) Vicente Saldivar
9) Salvador Sanchez
10) Ruben Olivares

Honorable mention: Alexis Arguello, Wilfred Benitez, Victor Galindez, Kid Gavilan, Jose Napoles, Carlos Zarate

[Rebel]

Originally posted by dmille:
1) Eder Jofre
2) Carlos Monzon
3) Roberto Duran
4) Pascual Perez
5) Manuel Ortiz
6) Miguel Canto
7) Panama Al Brown
8) Vicente Saldivar
9) Salvador Sanchez
10) Ruben Olivares

Honorable mention: Alexis Arguello, Wilfred Benitez, Victor Galindez, Kid Gavilan, Jose Napoles, Carlos Zarate No Chavez? Please explain this. :eek:

[supacal]

arguello should be on every single list.

[Valentino]

Originally posted by Rebel:

No Chavez? Please explain this. :eek: Chavez is not even in his top 100 ALL TIME GREAT fighters.

[Valentino]

Originally posted by dmille:
1) Eder Jofre
2) Carlos Monzon
3) Roberto Duran
4) Pascual Perez
5) Manuel Ortiz
6) Miguel Canto
7) Panama Al Brown
8) Vicente Saldivar
9) Salvador Sanchez
10) Ruben Olivares

Honorable mention: Alexis Arguello, Wilfred Benitez, Victor Galindez, Kid Gavilan, Jose Napoles, Carlos Zarate I cannot believe that I forgot Pascual Perez and Panama Al Brown.

[Valentino]

Originally posted by supacal:
arguello should be on every single list. I agree.

[mex fighter]

ooops, nevermind. sorry.

[ March 23, 2003, 07:59 AM: Message edited by: mex fighter ]

[Yori Boy]

I don't get like to go too far back in time....

1. Roberto Duran
2. Carlos Monzon
3. Julio Cesar Chavez
4. Eder Jofre
5. Ricardo Lopez
6. Alexis Arguello
7. Carlos Zarate
8. Ruben Olivares
9. Salvadore Sanchez
10. Felix Trinidad

Actually, looking back at it, perhaps Trinidad should be a notch or two higher???

[ March 23, 2003, 04:42 PM: Message edited by: Yory Boi ]

[El Dandy Casanova]

I know that this is a very subjective question but I don't see how it is possible to make a selection of guys I have never seen boxing. Of the ones that I have been able to watch at least 4-5 fights and base on meaningful accomplishments, challenges, risks taken and results against quality opposition (Probably there are some other fighters that deserve more to be in that list but they are from another era before mine) :


1- Chavez
2- Duran
3- Trinidad
4- Arguello
5- ODLH
6- Monzon
7- Olivares
8- Benitez
9- Gomez
10- R. Lopez

[Erratic]

I am with Casanova on this one...Many of the aforementioned greats are indeed before my time, although I have had the priviledge to see quite a few. I will post my list a little later when I have more time.

One serious question I do have...On what basis do some of you guys consider Trinidad on all time top 10 Latino fighter?

[HOMICIDE]

Originally posted by Erratic:
I am with Casanova on this one...Many of the aforementioned greats are indeed before my time, although I have had the priviledge to see quite a few. I will post my list a little later when I have more time.

One serious question I do have...On what basis do some of you guys consider Trinidad on all time top 10 Latino fighter? MAN FOR THE SHORT TIME U HAVE BEEN HERE IT SEEMS U HAVE PICKED UP ON THE MEX-FIGHTER/MEX-CREW HATERATION OF TITO TRINIDAD, OR ANYTHING THAT IS PUERTO RICAN....

[Valentino]

Originally posted by Erratic:
I am with Casanova on this one...Many of the aforementioned greats are indeed before my time, although I have had the priviledge to see quite a few. I will post my list a little later when I have more time.

One serious question I do have...On what basis do some of you guys consider Trinidad on all time top 10 Latino fighter? On the same basis that I consider Chavez and Lopez...they are the ONLY THREE fighters in the HISTORY OF THE SPORT to have the 20-10-8 that I have mentioned above.

I figure that top 10 P4P fighters like Duran, Robinson, Amstrong, Ali, Pepp, etc. didn't accomplished such a feat. But Trinidad did.

That in my book makes him Top 10 all time Latino. Also, he is top Puerto Rican All time fighter.

A top 10 Latino List without a Puerto Rican fighter on it is NOT a top 10 Latino List.

Puerto Rico has more champions in the History of Boxing per sq. mile of country.

[Erratic]

Originally posted by RAZOR:

MAN FOR THE SHORT TIME U HAVE BEEN HERE IT SEEMS U HAVE PICKED UP ON THE MEX-FIGHTER/MEX-CREW HATERATION OF TITO TRINIDAD, OR ANYTHING THAT IS PUERTO RICAN.... LOL...just cuz i am not a post whore doesn't mean I havent been here for a while...my Pops was one of the O.G. posters here and I would come and read what was on the forums ALL the time, but for a while Rebz wasn't letting any new blood in...since I registered I haven't really had to post very often since there are so many literate Boxing Fans here that there is no need to be redundent and beat a dead horse.

BTW: Anything P.R? Which other Puerto Rican have I questioned bro?

Hater??? It's not like I cap on The Macho Camacho's, Miguel Hotto's, and Pito Trinidad's of the world. :D

[Erratic]

Originally posted by Valentino:

On the same basis that I consider Chavez and Lopez...they are the ONLY THREE fighters in the HISTORY OF THE SPORT to have the 20-10-8 that I have mentioned above.

I figure that top 10 P4P fighters like Duran, Robinson, Amstrong, Ali, Pepp, etc. didn't accomplished such a feat. But Trinidad did.

That in my book makes him Top 10 all time Latino. Also, he is top Puerto Rican All time fighter.

A top 10 Latino List without a Puerto Rican fighter on it is NOT a top 10 Latino List.

Puerto Rico has more champions in the History of Boxing per sq. mile of country. I already posted what I thought about your 10-10-220 theory of Trinidad's reign in another thread. Acheiving that FEAT against mediocre opposition does not hold the same water. Trinidad has not earned the right to be mentioned with the fighters you named.

Btw: I'll acknowledge Puertican Champions when it is warranted...I just can't do that with Trinidad though. In my book he hasn't earned it.

[g-man]

Once again..
I will explain why Chavez is not on Dmille's list at all....

I said it before, Dmille, while knowledgeble doesn't think much of chavez since chavez campaigned in three weight classes..
two of which Dmille has stated in the past he does not recognize....
he aknowledges only the original eight, thus he does not reconginze anyone who achieved anything at miniflyweight, superflyweight, superbantamweight, superfeatherweight, superwelterweight, supermiddleweight...

thus, chavez is not accredited for anything he did at superfeather and superlight.. :rolleyes:
which also means why...

wilfredo gomez is not mentioned..
arguello..
de la hoya
barrera
morales
etc...

[ March 25, 2003, 08:41 PM: Message edited by: Hell... ]

[dmille]

Originally posted by Hell...:
Once again..
I will explain why Chavez is not on Dmille's list at all....

I said it before, Dmille, while knowledgeble doesn't think much of chavez since chavez campaigned in three weight classes..
two of which Dmille has stated in the past he does not recognize....
he aknowledges only the original eight, thus he does not reconginze anyone who achieved anything at miniflyweight, superflyweight, superbantamweight, superfeatherweight, superwelterweight, supermiddleweight...

thus, chavez is not accredited for anything he did at superfeather and superlight..
which also means why...

wilfredo gomez is not mentioned..
arguello..
de la hoya
barrera
morales
etc... I recognize those divisions. I just don't think of them in the same way that I think of the traditional divisions. I think that 99 per cent of the time the junior divisions are for ordinary fighters.

I consider every all-time rating to also be a pound-for-pound all-time rating. Each of the fighters I rate number one in the eight traditional weight classes is IMO also one of the top ten of all-time p4p.

Adding the junior divisions, we have seventeen divisions total. IMO the best junior/super weight class titleholders are not amongst the top 17 of all-time p4p.

Every fighter that I listed including the honorable mentions are in MY all-time pound-for-pound top 100. Any fighter (Chavez, Gomez) that is not listed is not IMO an all-time great.

I don't like to rate fighters on an all-time basis unless they are retired or clearly past their primes. IMO it usually takes between five and ten years to put a fighter's career into its proper historical perspective. That is why Oscar, Tito, MAB, Morales, etc. are not on my listing.

[g-man]

ok, fair enough..
but then why isn't gomez in there? HE is an all time great..
most everyone agree's he is the still regarded as the BEST SUPERBANTAMWEIGHT OF ALL TIME...

? :rolleyes:
to leave chavez out and put in saldivar, canto and el puas in place of chavez does not make any sense....

[mex fighter]

Originally posted by Valentino:

Puerto Rico has more champions in the History of Boxing per sq. mile of country. well, if you want to get technical about it....puerto rico has 1100 ricsters per sq. mile, while mexico has 100 meskins per square mile, sooooo, if the land size was equal, mexico has about a 13.238 more champs per sq mile. (or something like that) :D

[Floom]

1- Roysito Jon?s

The other nine wouldn't matter since Roysito would beat them all in the same night. YA'LL MUST'A FO'GOT!!!!!

ROYSITO IN DA HIZZIE WITH KIZZIE!!!!!

[Rebel]

Dmille, does this mean that according to you, Chavez, Arguello, Kostya Tsyzu, Oscar De La Hoya, and Aaron Pryor are not all-time greats? graemlins/headscratch.gif

[g-man]

that is exactly the point..

though they ruled/ rule those divisions with an iron hand..they are not even in his top 25...any race, of all time... :rolleyes:

[Rebel]

Originally posted by Hell...:
that is exactly the point..

though they ruled/ rule those divisions with an iron hand..they are not even in his top 25...any race, of all time... :rolleyes: Yeah it's not like God Almighty stated THOU SHALL NOT JUDGE FIGHTERS OUTSIDE OF THE ORIGINAL 8! It's not like most of those divisions were created yesterday. Every division should be given credit. They're part of boxing, the sport we all love.

[g-man]

el finito is not on the list either... :rolleyes:

[Valentino]

Originally posted by Erratic:

I already posted what I thought about your 10-10-220 theory of Trinidad's reign in another thread. Acheiving that FEAT against mediocre opposition does not hold the same water. Trinidad has not earned the right to be mentioned with the fighters you named.

Btw: I'll acknowledge Puertican Champions when it is warranted...I just can't do that with Trinidad though. In my book he hasn't earned it. Psst..psst...

Trinidad's level of oposition was as good as Chavez (which fought a bunch of JOURNEYMEN for most of his career) and certaintly better than Lopez.

Psst...pssst...

if this is "so achievable", how come ONLY THREE FIGHTERS in the HISTORY of BOXING managed to accomplished it.

Trinidad is one of the best fighters to ever fight. Saying otherwise is an insult to the sport.

[Valentino]

Originally posted by mex fighter:

well, if you want to get technical about it....puerto rico has 1100 ricsters per sq. mile, while mexico has 100 meskins per square mile, sooooo, if the land size was equal, mexico has about a 13.238 more champs per sq mile. (or something like that) :D The Population of Puerto Rico and Mexico was NOT the same in 1960, 1970, 1980, 1990, etc.

However, the SIZE of the land was the SAME.

Now, we are talking about the amount of champions in the HISTORY of BOXING (meaning, all those years)...therefore, we can only draw a comparison in something "static" (e.g. land size) and not with something "dynamic" (e.g. population).

If we were talking about a DECADE in particular, then I understand comparing population with amount of champions. But we are talking historically.

Puerto Rico has produced more champions per sq. mile.

If you want to compare per population, then pick the 1970s and we can do that. Or pick the 1980s or the 1990s.

[Valentino]

Originally posted by Rebel:
Dmille, does this mean that according to you, Chavez, Arguello, Kostya Tsyzu, Oscar De La Hoya, and Aaron Pryor are not all-time greats? graemlins/headscratch.gif Arguello is top 5 ALL TIME FEATHERWEIGHT. And not too far behind Salvador Sanchez (which is usually ranked 4 at that particular weight class).

Even if we put the 130 TOGETHER with the 135 lbs division, there is NOT doubt in my mind that Arguello is greater than MOST of the 135 pounders in boxing history.

If Dmille neglected Arguello, then something is wrong with his list (regardless of his argument).

Chavez is top 30 ALL TIME GREAT, IMO.

[Valentino]

Originally posted by Erratic:

One serious question I do have...On what basis do some of you guys consider Trinidad on all time top 10 Latino fighter? I'm going to be blunt.

I lived through Salvador Sanchez and Alexis Arguello prime.

In all honesty, both fighters and Trinidad were very similar. In fact, all three fighters experienced SERIOUS problems with "movers" or boxers.

Trinidad experienced with a GREAT fighter like ODLH.

Salvador experienced with a JOURNEYMAN and a GOOD fighter.

Alexis experienced with a relatively good fighter.

All three fighters had EXCEPTIONAL stanima, great offence, and were extremely skillful.

Sal died too young (age 23). If he would have lived 4 or 5 more years...he would have suffered the same ending that Arguello and Tito suffered.

Arguello is ranked higher (top 5) because he had CONSIDERABLY better level of oposition at HIS weight class and MOVING up.

Salvador best oponent was Gomez (which was moving up) and Little Red. Nelson was inexperience, although, therefore, it was NOT the same Nelso that fought 3 or 4 years later.

Chavez??? Chavez was in a league of his own (like Arguello).

Chavez and Arguello are CLEARLY top 5 Latinos.

Salvador and Trinidad are NOT. But they are top 10.

This is my unbias view on the matter.

P.S.

Take the Mexican hat when you do "serious" analysis...and you will see things clearly.

[lefthooker]

Originally posted by supacal:
arguello should be on every single list. You said it darlin'.
And a list of top Latin fighters without Chavez?
Go figure.

[g-man]

sounds about right..
though chavez clearly faced and beat more, and better champions over all than tito did..

[lefthooker]

Originally posted by Yory Boi:
I don't get like to go too far back in time....

1. Roberto Duran
2. Carlos Monzon
3. Julio Cesar Chavez
4. Eder Jofre
5. Ricardo Lopez
6. Alexis Arguello
7. Carlos Zarate
8. Ruben Olivares
9. Salvadore Sanchez
10. Felix Trinidad

Actually, looking back at it, perhaps Trinidad should be a notch or two higher??? Yori, that is a strong list.Arguments can, of course , be made for Napoles, Kid Gavilan ( Cuban), Ortiz, and, oh, so many other thrilling Latin fighters ( Kid Aztec, Cerventes,Benetez,Pintor,etc)
With only 10 slots, you have to leave some guys out.
But, if I must pick a bone with you ( and I must :D ) it is this;
Gomez simply MUST be on any all time Latin list.
An incredible and dominant fighter.

[Yori Boy]

Originally posted by Lefthooker:

Yori, that is a strong list.Arguments can, of course , be made for Napoles, Kid Gavilan ( Cuban), Ortiz, and, oh, so many other thrilling Latin fighters ( Kid Aztec, Cerventes,Benetez,Pintor,etc)
With only 10 slots, you have to leave some guys out.
But, if I must pick a bone with you ( and I must :D ) it is this;
Gomez simply MUST be on any all time Latin list.
An incredible and dominant fighter. I was thinking about Gomez, but I have Sal Sanchez at 8 and we know what happened. Just don't think his level of opposition was high enough. Maybe should have put him in instead of Zarate????

[Valentino]

Originally posted by Yory Boi:

I was thinking about Gomez, but I have Sal Sanchez at 8 and we know what happened. Just don't think his level of opposition was high enough. Maybe should have put him in instead of Zarate???? Good point...but we also know what happened to Zarate when he fought Gomez, which happened to defend his title 17 consecutive times (ALL by KO) against the likes of Zarate, Pintor, etc.

Gomez was a dominant fighter below 126 lbs.

And he was a SUPERB amateur fighter too...dominating CUBANS and the likes of Benitez.

I rank Trinidad above him, because Trinidad was more accoplished (due to his discipline). But Gomez was certaintly more talented.

[dmille]

Originally posted by Hell...:
ok, fair enough..
but then why isn't gomez in there? HE is an all time great..
most everyone agree's he is the still regarded as the BEST SUPERBANTAMWEIGHT OF ALL TIME...?
to leave chavez out and put in saldivar, canto and el puas in place of chavez does not make any sense.... First off, my spanish isn't too good. Que es "el puas"?

It doesn't make sense to you because you think Chavez is an all-time great. I don't agree.

Gomez: As I said before I don't see the junior divisions as beign equal to the traditional. I agree that Gomez is the best super banty/junior feather so far. BUT IMO that is not the same thing as saying that another fighter is the best feather or best bantam of all-time.

Is Gomez one of your top 17 pound-for-pound? Top 17, not top 25 or top 50 or top 100.

[neil]

el puas is olivares.

dmille, why does a guy have to be top 17 just because he's the best in a division? why does a guy have to be top 8 because he's the best in a traditional division?

cant one division be stronger than another? cant one notoriously stronger division have as many as 1000 guys better than the best in another weaker division?

[Remus]

Originally posted by El Dandy Casanova:
I know that this is a very subjective question but I don't see how it is possible to make a selection of guys I have never seen boxing. Of the ones that I have been able to watch at least 4-5 fights and base on meaningful accomplishments, challenges, risks taken and results against quality opposition (Probably there are some other fighters that deserve more to be in that list but they are from another era before mine) :


1- Chavez
2- Duran
3- Trinidad
4- Arguello
5- ODLH
6- Monzon
7- Olivares
8- Benitez
9- Gomez
10- R. Lopez i take your point about finding it hard to rank guys you have never seen fight. but their records and achievements speak for themselves in many cases. even if THAT isn't good enuf for you, you're better off not ranking them at all.

DLH/Tito ABOVE Monzon ? that is a complete disgrace. no offense bro and i aint trying to be harsh, but monzon is one of the greatest fighters of all time. dlh and tito have no business even being mentioned in the same breath as the guy. it's like comparing hakkinen and senna. both are champions, but only one of them is a LEGEND.

monzon should only be mentioned in the company of guys like duran and jofre. the next tier would be chavez, arguello. maybe i'd mention dlh at around 12-15 if i was forced to. but ceratinly not in monzons league, dayum.

[dmille]

Originally posted by Rebel:
Dmille, does this mean that according to you, Chavez, Arguello, Kostya Tsyzu, Oscar De La Hoya, and Aaron Pryor are not all-time greats?
Didn't I say in a previous post that I don't like to rate fighters unless they are retired or clearly past their primes? Oscar and ZOO are still active and still at the top of the sport. I don't rate them yet.

Oscar looks to me like an all-time great and a fighter of destiny. He is one of only six fighters to have held titles at light and welter. IMO the true question of his legacy will be against Hopkins for the middle title. I think Oscar will join Duran as the only fighters to hold titles at 135, 147 and 160. BUT the final chapter hasn't been written yet.

ZOO looks like a very good fighter, what I like to refer to as a legend-in-his-own-time as opposed to all-time.

I thought I said that everyone I listed is in MY top 100 p4p of all-time. I don't see how that was so hard to understand. Didn't you notice Arguello's name there?

Maybe this will help. Latino fighters in MY P4P all-time ratings:

9) Jofre
10) Monzon
12) Duran
18) Perez
25) Ortiz
26) Canto
33) Brown
34) Saldivar
50) Sanchez
56) Olivares

58) Napoles
62) Arguello
64) Gavilan
73) Zarate
74) Benitez
81) Galindez

Pryor is IMO the number one 140 lber of all-time.

It is not like these rankings are some closely guarded secret. I have posted MY ratings on several web sites, including this one.

[mex fighter]

the word "pua" means something like barbed wire....at least the sharp part.

his knickname implies being a razor or something like that.

[dmille]

Originally posted by neil:
el puas is olivares.

dmille, why does a guy have to be top 17 just because he's the best in a division? why does a guy have to be top 8 because he's the best in a traditional division?

cant one division be stronger than another? cant one notoriously stronger division have as many as 1000 guys better than the best in another weaker division? A thousand? That weaker division you had in mind has got to be a junior division.

IMO every all-time rating is an all-time pound-for-pound rating. If you disagree, rate them how you want to.

I say top 17 to put the junior divisions in their proper perspective. If you think the best junior titleholders are equal to the best traditional weight champions, then it shouldn't be that much of a stretch.

Is Gomez an equal fighter on a pound-for-pound basis to whoever is IYO the best feather or the best banty ever?

[Yori Boy]

Originally posted by dmille:


It is not like these rankings are some closely guarded secret. I have posted MY ratings on several web sites, including this one. Do you do it for cominc relief? Victor Galindez higher on an all time list than Julio Cesar Chavez.

Why don't you call this list a list a list of greatest fighters based on achievements outside of catch weights or something. Who is going to take your unique criteria seriously? Nobody. graemlins/drunk.gif

[g-man]

lol..

anyway, ''puas'' is the nickname of olivares and it means the spiky stuff on the back of porky pines ...olivares hair looked like that back in the day, a whole bunch of thick hair which just stood straight up at the center of his head....

[Mark G]

Originally posted by Hell...:
Once again..
I will explain why Chavez is not on Dmille's list at all....

I said it before, Dmille, while knowledgeble doesn't think much of chavez since chavez campaigned in three weight classes..
two of which Dmille has stated in the past he does not recognize....
he aknowledges only the original eight, thus he does not reconginze anyone who achieved anything at miniflyweight, superflyweight, superbantamweight, superfeatherweight, superwelterweight, supermiddleweight...

thus, chavez is not accredited for anything he did at superfeather and superlight.. :rolleyes:
which also means why...

wilfredo gomez is not mentioned..
arguello..
de la hoya
barrera
morales
etc... Chavez didn't even receive and honorable mention, fuckin' ridiculous is what it is.

[Mark G]

Originally posted by dmille:

I recognize those divisions. I just don't think of them in the same way that I think of the traditional divisions. I think that 99 per cent of the time the junior divisions are for ordinary fighters.

I consider every all-time rating to also be a pound-for-pound all-time rating. Each of the fighters I rate number one in the eight traditional weight classes is IMO also one of the top ten of all-time p4p.

Adding the junior divisions, we have seventeen divisions total. IMO the best junior/super weight class titleholders are not amongst the top 17 of all-time p4p.

Every fighter that I listed including the honorable mentions are in MY all-time pound-for-pound top 100. Any fighter (Chavez, Gomez) that is not listed is not IMO an all-time great.

I don't like to rate fighters on an all-time basis unless they are retired or clearly past their primes. IMO it usually takes between five and ten years to put a fighter's career into its proper historical perspective. That is why Oscar, Tito, MAB, Morales, etc. are not on my listing. Your shit's funny. Sometimes a champion at a "traditional" weight class will be better than someone in a jr. or super division,and sometimes they will NOT be. It would be more realistic and analytical if you analyzed each fighter on an INDIVIDUAL bases based on there accomplishments and who they beat regardless of what weight class they fought in.

Just in the last few years,think about it. Morales and Barrera fought at 122, and proved to be better than the featherweights!

Mayweather, another one of boxing's best, was fighting at 130 and was a better champion than the lightweights.

Ricardo Lopez fought for most of his career at mini flyweight, and Chavez fought for most of his career at 130 and 140, and its fuckin obvious that he's a great fighter. As the time goes on, now that the jr and super weight classes are achieving more and more credibility, your rating system will look increasingly inaccurate and fictional.

I respect your boxing historical knowledge and intelligence, but it seems more and more than you rely on a rating system that doesn't reflect reality (Victor Galindez higher than Ricardo Lopez and JC Chavez etc.) I would advise you to analyze fighters on an INDIVIDUAL BASIS instead of sticking to such a rigid system.

Who do you rank higher?

Virgil Hill or Ricardo Lopez?

Tim Austin or Eric Morales?

Kostya Tszyu or Paul Spadafora?

Manuel Medina or Marco Antonio Barrera?

Greg Haugen or Aaron Pryor?

Fernando Vargas or Six Heads Lewis?

According to your rating system, it seems that Hill, Austin, Spadafora, Medina, Haugen and Six Heads would be better than Lopez, Barrera, Morales, Zoo, Pryor, and Vargas.

[ March 28, 2003, 10:48 AM: Message edited by: Mark G ]

[g-man]

tongue.gif

[Erratic]

Originally posted by Valentino:

Psst..psst...

Trinidad's level of oposition was as good as Chavez (which fought a bunch of JOURNEYMEN for most of his career) and certaintly better than Lopez.

Psst...pssst...

if this is "so achievable", how come ONLY THREE FIGHTERS in the HISTORY of BOXING managed to accomplished it.

Trinidad is one of the best fighters to ever fight. Saying otherwise is an insult to the sport. psst psst...
WHY THE HELL ARE YOU WHISPERING?!?!?
Are you trying to keep your voice down so no one else will hear your logic?

Anyhoo man...Chavez may have fought journey men here and there, but that's because he fought EVERYONE!!! He left no questions about himself unanswered! He fought anyone anywhere, even if it meant fighting in their hometown. Chavez is a VERY special individual. No one is even close to duplicating what he did in his career. To mention Tito's name in the same sentence is the INSULT.

Why are you quoting the words, "so achievable?" I never said it was "so achievable," just pointing out that it wasn't as remarkable or notable.

[Erratic]

Originally posted by Valentino:

I'm going to be blunt.

I lived through Salvador Sanchez and Alexis Arguello prime.

In all honesty, both fighters and Trinidad were very similar. In fact, all three fighters experienced SERIOUS problems with "movers" or boxers.

Trinidad experienced with a GREAT fighter like ODLH.

Salvador experienced with a JOURNEYMAN and a GOOD fighter.

Alexis experienced with a relatively good fighter.

All three fighters had EXCEPTIONAL stanima, great offence, and were extremely skillful.

Sal died too young (age 23). If he would have lived 4 or 5 more years...he would have suffered the same ending that Arguello and Tito suffered.

Arguello is ranked higher (top 5) because he had CONSIDERABLY better level of oposition at HIS weight class and MOVING up.

Salvador best oponent was Gomez (which was moving up) and Little Red. Nelson was inexperience, although, therefore, it was NOT the same Nelso that fought 3 or 4 years later.

Chavez??? Chavez was in a league of his own (like Arguello).

Chavez and Arguello are CLEARLY top 5 Latinos.

Salvador and Trinidad are NOT. But they are top 10.

This is my unbias view on the matter.

P.S.

Take the Mexican hat when you do "serious" analysis...and you will see things clearly. LOL the mexican hat.

Sorry bro the Hat don't ever come off. I am and always will be proud of my heritage. Much like you are.

My opinions are as unbiased as you CLAIM yours to be.

Before you try to pull the race card on me though you should understand that I have nothing against Tito, or Puerto Ricans for that matter. In all reality I respect him as a fighter. I think he is a phenominal athlete. The guy had great stamina, power and always came to fight. He came in to knock your head off every fight, no nonsense kinda guy. Before he got "big" he was even humble. Not shouting out Viva Puelto Lico every five seconds saying he is a great champion all the time. Believe me the guy HAD skills, no doubt...but he left too many questions unanswered for me as a fight fan. When I think back to his career and genuinely ask myself which fights stand out, which fights were important to his legacy, I can really only think of three. First he won* a controversial decision against a future hall of famer, beat up an Aztec kid who had 20 fights(but got knocked down and had to resort to low blows before putting the kitten to sleep), and got KTFO in his bid to move up in weight.

He had a lot of great attributes as a fighter. What he didn't have was that aura of invincibilty that the other greats had. To me he will always be an explosive fighter who had a questionable chin, got schooled by DLH, then failed to punish the man who disrespected his country.

Great Latino Fighter? Absolutely!!!
Top 10...Hell No!
graemlins/mex.gif

[ March 28, 2003, 01:07 PM: Message edited by: Erratic ]

[g-man]

opposition...
while I DO THINK HIGHLY OF TITO..HE is by no means in the same league as chavez...
here's why..

tito fought 19 NOBODIES as it is put before getting his first title shot, with only Jake Rodriguez as a recongizable opponent before then..
one of those guys dropped tito badly and almost knoked him ot within those 19 fights...

tito won the ibf welter title vs a washed up maurice blocker...

he beat 9 former / future/ present (at the time of the fight champions)..
a couple of those guys were washed up by the time tito got them, (no fault of his own, I may add)
particularly in whitaker.
winning three titles in three different divisions... defending his title(s) 19 times before OFFICIALLY losing (stopped) by hops..
we all know dlh did beat him too, whole different story)

Chavez fought...
43 guys before getting his title shots
that's more than twice the ''NOBODIES'' that trinidad faced..

he fought 48 more times before tasting defeat (randall 1) he beat 19 (taylor twice) former/present/ or future to be champions at very near or in their primes winning 3 titles in three different divisions while at it and defending his title(s) succesfully) 24 times before losing to randall..... (winning them did not count in this)
looking back at the names and quality of the opposition chavez and tito faced (as champions) it is very clear, chavez beat the better people over all.
so while tito is/was indeed a very good/great fighter..
chavez was far superior in all aspects...

[ March 28, 2003, 01:23 PM: Message edited by: Hell... ]

[Erratic]

Like I said before, I have not seen ALL of the greats that some of you knowledgeable guys have. But from what I can actually say I have seen and read/heard about, this is my list:

Chavez
Duran
R.Lopez
Monzon
Arguello
S.Sanchez
W.Gomez
Zarate
Olivares
Benitez

Honorable Mentions:
Mantequilla Napoles, Canto, Espadas Sr., Bobby Chacon, D. Lopez, Mando Muniz

[dmille]

Originally posted by Mark G:

Your shit's funny. Sometimes a champion at a "traditional" weight class will be better than someone in a jr. or super division,and sometimes they will NOT be. It would be more realistic and analytical if you analyzed each fighter on an INDIVIDUAL bases based on there accomplishments and who they beat regardless of what weight class they fought in.

Just in the last few years,think about it. Morales and Barrera fought at 122, and proved to be better than the featherweights!

Mayweather, another one of boxing's best, was fighting at 130 and was a better champion than the lightweights.

Ricardo Lopez fought for most of his career at mini flyweight, and Chavez fought for most of his career at 130 and 140, and its fuckin obvious that he's a great fighter. As the time goes on, now that the jr and super weight classes are achieving more and more credibility, your rating system will look increasingly inaccurate and fictional.

I respect your boxing historical knowledge and intelligence, but it seems more and more than you rely on a rating system that doesn't reflect reality (Victor Galindez higher than Ricardo Lopez and JC Chavez etc.) I would advise you to analyze fighters on an INDIVIDUAL BASIS instead of sticking to such a rigid system.

Who do you rank higher?

Virgil Hill or Ricardo Lopez?

Tim Austin or Eric Morales?

Kostya Tszyu or Paul Spadafora?

Manuel Medina or Marco Antonio Barrera?

Greg Haugen or Aaron Pryor?

Fernando Vargas or Six Heads Lewis?

According to your rating system, it seems that Hill, Austin, Spadafora, Medina, Haugen and Six Heads would be better than Lopez, Barrera, Morales, Zoo, Pryor, and Vargas. 99 per cent of the time junior titles are for ordinary fighters. The best of them win titles in traditional weight classes.

IYO they are gaining more credibility? Take any junior division, remove the names of titleholders that have also won titles at traditional weights and then show me ten all-time great fighters. Hell, show me five all-time greats.

It can't be done. In fact, take any junior division; then show me ten all-time great fighters that won both junior and traditional weight titles whose primes were at the junior weight. You will still be hard pressed to come up with five all-timers.

MAB and Erik have won titles at 126. So far they have proved they were better than most featherweights AT featherweight.

IMO Mayweather should have had his entire title reign at 135.

Remind me what was the result of Finito's fights against Carbajal and Gonzalez? "Hey man, they were in a different weight class." IMO to the truly great fighter weight doesn't matter (within reason of course).

IMO the worst part is that fights between them and Lopez would have been HUGE and he would have had an excellent chance of winning. It would be much more impressive to be able to say that he DID defeat them. BUT we can't say that. We can only say that in our opinion he WOULD HAVE.

As far as who I rate higher, the only ones that I rate of the 12 are Lopez and Pryor.

How many times do I have to say that I don't like to rate fighters on an all-time basis unless they are retired or clearly past their primes. Nine of them are still active and four still reigning titleholders.

I don't know who you rate number one all-time at 130 or 140. I am gonna guess that at one or both, it is JCC. So I will just ask my basic question again. Do you consider Chavez to be one of the top 17 fighters of all-time?

[dmille]

Originally posted by Hell...:
opposition...
while I DO THINK HIGHLY OF TITO..HE is by no means in the same league as chavez...
here's why..

tito fought 19 NOBODIES as it is put before getting his first title shot, with only Jake Rodriguez as a recongizable opponent before then..
one of those guys dropped tito badly and almost knocked him out within those 19 fights...

tito won the ibf welter title vs a washed up maurice blocker...

he beat 9 former / future/ present (at the time of the fight champions)..
a couple of those guys were washed up by the time tito got them, (no fault of his own, I may add)
particularly in whitaker.
winning three titles in three different divisions... defending his title(s) 19 times before OFFICIALLY losing (stopped) by hops..
we all know dlh did beat him too, whole different story)

Chavez fought...
43 guys before getting his title shots
that's more than twice the ''NOBODIES'' that trinidad faced..

he fought 48 more times before tasting defeat (randall 1) he beat 19 (taylor twice) former/present/ or future to be champions at very near or in their primes winning 3 titles in three different divisions while at it and defending his title(s) succesfully) 24 times before losing to randall..... (winning them did not count in this)
looking back at the names and quality of the opposition chavez and tito faced (as champions) it is very clear, chavez beat the better people over all.
so while tito is/was indeed a very good/great fighter..
chavez was far superior in all aspects... Trinidad: One of those guy dropped and hurt Tito badly? Alberto Cortes? I seem to recall that he was stopped in the third round.

Chavez: 48 more before tasting defeat? Don't you mean before the judges LET HIM taste defeat?

Because I think you need to pop in a tape of Chavez-LaPorte.

[Valentino]

Originally posted by Hell...:
opposition...
while I DO THINK HIGHLY OF TITO..HE is by no means in the same league as chavez...
here's why..

tito fought 19 NOBODIES as it is put before getting his first title shot, with only Jake Rodriguez as a recongizable opponent before then..
one of those guys dropped tito badly and almost knoked him ot within those 19 fights...

tito won the ibf welter title vs a washed up maurice blocker...

he beat 9 former / future/ present (at the time of the fight champions)..
a couple of those guys were washed up by the time tito got them, (no fault of his own, I may add)
particularly in whitaker.
winning three titles in three different divisions... defending his title(s) 19 times before OFFICIALLY losing (stopped) by hops..
we all know dlh did beat him too, whole different story)

Chavez fought...
43 guys before getting his title shots
that's more than twice the ''NOBODIES'' that trinidad faced..

he fought 48 more times before tasting defeat (randall 1) he beat 19 (taylor twice) former/present/ or future to be champions at very near or in their primes winning 3 titles in three different divisions while at it and defending his title(s) succesfully) 24 times before losing to randall..... (winning them did not count in this)
looking back at the names and quality of the opposition chavez and tito faced (as champions) it is very clear, chavez beat the better people over all.
so while tito is/was indeed a very good/great fighter..
chavez was far superior in all aspects... How old was Trinidad when he fought those 19 fighters? How old was he when he was given a shot at the title?

That's my point...he had a short Amateur career...was practically a child when he won the Title (only 20 years old)...and managed to accomplish what he accomplished.

And he did that with less fights to prepare him...Chavez was already WELL SCHOOLED in the ART of BOXING when he won the title. Trinidad was not...he was a kid with little experience.

[Valentino]

Originally posted by Erratic:
Like I said before, I have not seen ALL of the greats that some of you knowledgeable guys have. But from what I can actually say I have seen and read/heard about, this is my list:

Chavez
Duran
R.Lopez
Monzon
Arguello
S.Sanchez
W.Gomez
Zarate
Olivares
Benitez

Honorable Mentions:
Mantequilla Napoles, Canto, Espadas Sr., Bobby Chacon, D. Lopez, Mando Muniz I will tell you straight up...Trinidad was greater than Gomez and Benitez. And certaintly greater than Olivarez. And as great as Sanchez.

I agree with the others in your list.

[Mark G]

Originally posted by dmille:

99 per cent of the time junior titles are for ordinary fighters. The best of them win titles in traditional weight classes.

IYO they are gaining more credibility? Take any junior division, remove the names of titleholders that have also won titles at traditional weights and then show me ten all-time great fighters. Hell, show me five all-time greats.

It can't be done. In fact, take any junior division; then show me ten all-time great fighters that won both junior and traditional weight titles whose primes were at the junior weight. You will still be hard pressed to come up with five all-timers.

MAB and Erik have won titles at 126. So far they have proved they were better than most featherweights AT featherweight.

IMO Mayweather should have had his entire title reign at 135.

Remind me what was the result of Finito's fights against Carbajal and Gonzalez? "Hey man, they were in a different weight class." IMO to the truly great fighter weight doesn't matter (within reason of course).

IMO the worst part is that fights between them and Lopez would have been HUGE and he would have had an excellent chance of winning. It would be much more impressive to be able to say that he DID defeat them. BUT we can't say that. We can only say that in our opinion he WOULD HAVE.

As far as who I rate higher, the only ones that I rate of the 12 are Lopez and Pryor.

How many times do I have to say that I don't like to rate fighters on an all-time basis unless they are retired or clearly past their primes. Nine of them are still active and four still reigning titleholders.

I don't know who you rate number one all-time at 130 or 140. I am gonna guess that at one or both, it is JCC. So I will just ask my basic question again. Do you consider Chavez to be one of the top 17 fighters of all-time? I analyze each weight class based on who is in it, and I analyze each fighter based on who he has fought and beaten. It is a more specific and targeted method of evaluation. It is more accurate to analyze on an individual basis instead of just saying "ALL traditional classes" or "ALL jr and super division" or ALL fighters that fought in this or that division.

Of course, a lower number of all time great fighters exist in jr and super weight classes, but in the last decade, four of the greatest fighters are Trinidad, Lopez, Chavez, Whitaker, and Chavez and Lopez both spent the bulk of their careers in non traditional weight classes.

Regardless of weight class, Chavez fought good opponents and was awesome in the ring. If the weight class that he fought him prevented him from taking on and beating good opponents, you would have a point, but since it clearly DID NOT, I would argue that your rating system is flawed in this case.

Is Chavez a top 17 all time great? Hell yes!

[dmille]

Originally posted by Mark G:
I analyze each weight class based on who is in it, and I analyze each fighter based on who he has fought and beaten. It is a more specific and targeted method of evaluation. It is more accurate to analyze on an individual basis instead of just saying "ALL traditional classes" or "ALL jr and super division" or ALL fighters that fought in this or that division.

Of course, a lower number of all time great fighters exist in jr and super weight classes, but in the last decade, four of the greatest fighters are Trinidad, Lopez, Chavez, Whitaker, and Chavez and Lopez both spent the bulk of their careers in non traditional weight classes.

Regardless of weight class, Chavez fought good opponents and was awesome in the ring. If the weight class that he fought him prevented him from taking on and beating good opponents, you would have a point, but since it clearly DID NOT, I would argue that your rating system is flawed in this case.

Is Chavez a top 17 all time great? Hell yes!I know that the focus of this discussion has been on Chavez, but I can't help myself from having to address your comments on Ricardo Lopez.

No fight with Carbajal, no fight with Gonzalez. That sums it up for me.

He is IMO the best junior/junior flyweight so far. BUT he could have made himself into a superstar and a millionaire by fighting them.

How can you call him an all-time great without those wins on his ledger?

As far as Chavez goes, I disagree that he is an all-time great no matter the rating system. But you knew that already.

[Punchy]

Can anybody give me some info on the Trinidad-Cortes fight? i read Tito was knocked down twice in the second, but came back to stop Cortes in the third... what are some other details? how bad was Felix hurt?

[Valentino]

Originally posted by Punchy:
Can anybody give me some info on the Trinidad-Cortes fight? i read Tito was knocked down twice in the second, but came back to stop Cortes in the third... what are some other details? how bad was Felix hurt? The fight took place in the Jr. Welterweight Division (in which Tito managed to be ranked)...he was knockdown twice and he was hurt.

But he came back and gave Cortes a beating on the following round.

I think Tito was 19 or so years old when that happened.

[Punchy]

thanks... i want to get my hands on that fight. it's hard to get though.

[Erratic]

Originally posted by Valentino:

I will tell you straight up...Trinidad was greater than Gomez and Benitez. And certaintly greater than Olivarez. And as great as Sanchez.

I agree with the others in your list. I think we are just going to have to agree to disagree in this case...

Trinidad greater than GOMEZ??? but, but, but WHY?!?!? What the hell was his record going into the Sanchez fight? Wasn't it like 34-0-34??? After fighting the likes of Zarate and Olivares?(Granted Zarate was coming up in weight and Olivarez doing a pretty damn good job for 12 rounds)To me he had like I said earlier, that aura of invincibilty. Tito NEVER had that.

I mean if you are gonna base your judgement on his accomplishments at an early age then I guess you hold Fernando Vargas in even higher regard? How old was he when he won a title? After how many fights? And then faced a dangerous and seasoned veteran like Tito with only 20 fights under his belt!!! (He put a lot of chinks in Tito's armor btw)I just don't see the logic in holding Tito in such high regard as Sal Sanchez and even higher regard than Gomez. :confused:

[Erratic]

Originally posted by Valentino:

The fight took place in the Jr. Welterweight Division (in which Tito managed to be ranked)...he was knockdown twice and he was hurt.

But he came back and gave Cortes a beating on the following round.

I think Tito was 19 or so years old when that happened. See fights like this are what I am talking about...Too many questions.

I know you are going to say he was only 19 years old, but come on...There are guys who turn pro at 17. I mean look at Barerra...The guy will someday be on my Top 10 list. Turned pro at 17 I believe.(Correct me if i am wrong)

[ March 29, 2003, 09:51 AM: Message edited by: Erratic ]

[dmille]

Originally posted by Erratic:Trinidad greater than GOMEZ??? but, but, but WHY?!?!? What the hell was his record going into the Sanchez fight? Wasn't it like 34-0-34??? After fighting the likes of Zarate and Olivares?(Granted Zarate was coming up in weight and Olivarez doing a pretty damn good job for 12 rounds)To me he had like I said earlier, that aura of invincibilty. Tito NEVER had that.Gomez NEVER fought Ruben Olivares!

[Erratic]

Originally posted by dmille:

Gomez NEVER fought Ruben Olivares! AAAAAAAAAHHH!!! You are right...I meant Lupe Pintor...(U know the names sound the same)oops...my bad graemlins/drunk.gif graemlins/crazy.gif

[Erratic]

Hey dMille...
Was Barerra 17 when he turned pro?

[Rebel]

Originally posted by Erratic:
Hey dMille...
Was Barerra 17 when he turned pro? Actually he was 15 1/2. :eek: Morales was 17 when he turned bro.

[Erratic]

Originally posted by Rebel:

Actually he was 15 1/2. :eek: Morales was 17 when he turned bro. Thanx Rebel,


But anyhow that is my point...How much "amateur experience" can one possibly have turning pro at 15 or 17 years years old? And both of these fighters will (IMO) one day be All time Top 10 Latino Fighters.

[Rebel]

Originally posted by Erratic:

Thanx Rebel,


But anyhow that is my point...How much "amateur experience" can one possibly have turning pro at 15 or 17 years years old? And both of these fighters will (IMO) one day be All time Top 10 Latino Fighters. I totally agree. Many Latino fighters, particularly Mexicans, start their amateur careers as kids fighting men in the tough Mexican circuit. It says a lot when guys like Morales and Barrera rise to the cream of crop w/o an extensive amateur background.

Just for the record, Morales and Barrera did have some training as kids.

Barrera had about 60 amateur fights and Morales had about 114.

[ March 29, 2003, 11:23 AM: Message edited by: Rebel ]

[g-man]

trinidad was hurt very bad, as bad as ever seen him vs cortez..
and fine..let's say that la porte's fight could have gone either way...
trinidad was CLEARLY beat by dlh..
trinidad had king and he is the one who hooked up the title shot early for tito vs a shot blocker..

chavez HAD to wait, and was supposed to lose to azabache martinez, as he was a heavy underdog..(CHAVEZ DESTROYED MARTINEZ) martinez went on to get ROBBED BIG TIME in his next title shot vs azumah nelson...
like I said...
tito was very good/great...
not in the same league as chavez by any means...

[TIP]

Originally posted by dmille:

I know that the focus of this discussion has been on Chavez, but I can't help myself from having to address your comments on Ricardo Lopez.

No fight with Carbajal, no fight with Gonzalez. That sums it up for me.

He is IMO the best junior/junior flyweight so far. BUT he could have made himself into a superstar and a millionaire by fighting them.

How can you call him an all-time great without those wins on his ledger?

As far as Chavez goes, I disagree that he is an all-time great no matter the rating system. But you knew that already. Lopez blew out a guy (Sorjataurong) who went 26-0 after the Lopez loss. Saman ko'd Gonzales for the title and had 10 defenses during this time before losing to Choi. TIP

[Boxeo]

Originally posted by Erratic:

I already posted what I thought about your 10-10-220 theory of Trinidad's reign in another thread. Acheiving that FEAT against mediocre opposition does not hold the same water. Trinidad has not earned the right to be mentioned with the fighters you named.

Btw: I'll acknowledge Puertican Champions when it is warranted...I just can't do that with Trinidad though. In my book he hasn't earned it. I second that carnal, Just like Hopkins breaking Monzons record by fighting Daniels and Hakkar back to back doesnt make him a boxing legend.

Tito was a great fighter but he is way overrated mainly by Puerto Ricans.

[mex fighter]

overrated by puerto ricans? nahhhhhhhhh....i mean, after all, after he beat p4p contender joppy, 99.9% of them were convinced tito would ko roy jones easily.

he was "hardly" overrated by them.

(now, he retired like a bitch after getting his flag stepped on in his own country) ooops

kinda like them rags in iraq...they can have their little flag burning get togethers over there, but if they do it here, THEY GET KNOCKED THE FUCK OUT....which is what tito should have done to hops.

[Valdosta]

Originally posted by Los Tres Delinquentes:

I second that carnal, Just like Hopkins breaking Monzons record by fighting Daniels and Hakkar back to back doesnt make him a boxing legend.

Tito was a great fighter but he is way overrated mainly by Puerto Ricans. You should hold ODLH to the same standard. "Some" people think he has won the championship in 5 different divisions. The fact is, ODLH never fought the best guy at 130, 135 or 140. :cool:

[mex fighter]

read it and weep, whiners and haters....when dlh ko's hops, he'll be champ in 6 different weight classes.

thats why his name should be de la p4p.

[el patron]

Originally posted by mex fighter:
read it and weep, whiners and haters....when dlh ko's hops, he'll be champ in 6 different weight classes.

thats why his name should be de la p4p. That's right cabron. What do you think of my avatar?

[neil]

Originally posted by TIP:

Lopez blew out a guy (Sorjataurong) who went 26-0 after the Lopez loss. Saman ko'd Gonzales for the title and had 10 defenses during this time before losing to Choi. TIP and sorjaturong flew 30 hours to fight finito in mexico.

[neil]

Originally posted by mex fighter:
read it and weep, whiners and haters....when dlh ko's hops, he'll be champ in 6 different weight classes.

thats why his name should be de la p4p. if oscar fights hopkins he'll get de la pounded.

[Valentino]

Originally posted by Erratic:

See fights like this are what I am talking about...Too many questions.

I know you are going to say he was only 19 years old, but come on...There are guys who turn pro at 17. I mean look at Barerra...The guy will someday be on my Top 10 list. Turned pro at 17 I believe.(Correct me if i am wrong) Gomez was ALMOST ko earlier in his career too...and his first pro fight was a draw.

Arguello lost to Fernandez (a journeyman) during Arguello's prime.

Sal is not without reproach. He did lost a fight and he should have lost another.

Barrera?

Barrera is NO WAY is going to be greater than Trinidad or for that matter Benitez or Gomez.

[Valentino]

Originally posted by Erratic:

Thanx Rebel,


But anyhow that is my point...How much "amateur experience" can one possibly have turning pro at 15 or 17 years years old? And both of these fighters will (IMO) one day be All time Top 10 Latino Fighters. Get your Mexican hat off.

Morales MAYBE. Barrera won't.


Benitez was a WORLD CHAMPION at age 17...Tito at age 20.

And both were dominant fighters.

I won't even bother debating with you. Because I know you were not even around when most of those fighters fought.

Trinidad is top 10 WITHOUT a DOUBT.

Olivarez was a fucking DRUNK.

[Valentino]

Originally posted by Los Tres Delinquentes:

I second that carnal, Just like Hopkins breaking Monzons record by fighting Daniels and Hakkar back to back doesnt make him a boxing legend.

Tito was a great fighter but he is way overrated mainly by Puerto Ricans. The MOST overrated Latino fighter of all time is Salvador Sanchez.

A LEGEND on his own right...but the man never unified (I pick Pedroza over him) nor moved up and fought somebody like Arguello.

[g-man]

:rolleyes:

[dmille]

Originally posted by Valentino:
Salvador Sanchez...never unified (I pick Pedroza over him)Pedroza over Sal? Based on what?

[dmille]

Originally posted by TIP:Lopez blew out a guy (Sorjataurong) who went 26-0 after the Lopez loss. Saman ko'd Gonzales for the title and had 10 defenses during this time before losing to Choi.He blew out a guy with only 17 fights? Who was 1-1-1 in his last three fights including a SIX round decision loss? Who had gone 10 rounds only once, in that draw?

What was he WHEN they fought? Instead of fighting the guy who was gonna win the junior fly title two years later, why wasn't he fighting the guys who held that title at the time?

Then again Carbajal did have 27 fights, not 17, while Gonzalez had 37. So I guess maybe it is understandable why he didn't fight them. Better to build up an "impressive" ledger against novices than to take on guys that were proven.

[mex fighter]

based on his being a mexican, and that hes a natural bantamweight w/o the mexo.

[dmille]

Originally posted by mex fighter: based on his being a mexican, and that hes a natural bantamweight w/o the mexo.I seem to recall that Pedroza got destroyed in two rounds when he was a bantam.

[Valentino]

Originally posted by dmille:

Pedroza over Sal? Based on what? Based on styles. I'm talking about PRIME Pedroza...the MOVER with uncanny stanima. Not the one that fought the Irish.

Besides, Sanchez was far from "unbeatable". Or at least that is the recollection of I had of him (it appears he has become some kind of SUPER MAN years after his death). The kid was vulnerable to certain styles.

[ March 30, 2003, 10:58 AM: Message edited by: Valentino ]

[Valentino]

Originally posted by dmille:

I seem to recall that Pedroza got destroyed in two rounds when he was a bantam. That was then...I'm sure you remember how Pedroza "changed" when he won the title at Featherweight. It was certaintly an 180 degree change.

I see Pedroza (+ dirty tactics) fight with Sanchez unfolding like Hopkins-Trinidad.

I do rate Sanchez HIGHER in boxing history by the way. But it is about styles.

I never liked Pedroza...but their is no denial...the man knew how to win.

[Erratic]

Originally posted by Valentino:

Gomez was ALMOST ko earlier in his career too...and his first pro fight was a draw.

Arguello lost to Fernandez (a journeyman) during Arguello's prime.

Sal is not without reproach. He did lost a fight and he should have lost another.

Barrera?

Barrera is NO WAY is going to be greater than Trinidad or for that matter Benitez or Gomez. There have been many great fighters who have lost man...the difference...all of the men you listed came back from defeat and did great things...What did Tito do????

You are the one who needs to take the straw hat off my friend.
Trinidad greater than Barrera? Why? 10-10-220 again? :rolleyes:

[mex fighter]

hey man, tito beat grandma cherifi. NOW THATS AN ACCOMPLISHMENT!!!!!!

[Erratic]

Originally posted by mex fighter:
hey man, tito beat grandma cherifi. NOW THATS AN ACCOMPLISHMENT!!!!!! SHIT!!! I forgot about that one!!!

[mex fighter]

saludame a tu jefito.

[Erratic]

I will.

Maybe we can hook up the next time we are in your part of town. graemlins/beer.gif

[Rebel]

Originally posted by Erratic:

There have been many great fighters who have lost man...the difference...all of the men you listed came back from defeat and did great things...What did Tito do????

You are the one who needs to take the straw hat off my friend.
Trinidad greater than Barrera? Why? 10-10-220 again? :rolleyes: Barrera should have 1 legit victory over Morales. That's a bigger win than any one win Trinidad has on his record. We all know the DLH fight wasn't legit, it was a gift decision. Barrera does have a case for being Trinidad's equal IMO. In the eyes of most, he's convincingly defeated two top P4Pers in the last several years. Trinidad can't say the same.

[Valdosta]

Originally posted by Rebel:

Barrera should have 1 legit victory over Morales. That's a bigger win than any one win Trinidad has on his record. We all know the DLH fight wasn't legit, it was a gift decision. Barrera does have a case for being Trinidad's equal IMO. In the eyes of most, he's convincingly defeated two top P4Pers in the last several years. Trinidad can't say the same. Trinidad also didn't get bitchslapped by Junior Jones (twice). When he fought the inferior fighters he always won. Also, whether people like it or not Tito will always own the "W" ove ODLH. MAB isn't ahead of Tito (yet).

[Valdosta]

Originally posted by Erratic:

SHIT!!! I forgot about that one!!! According to your list you rank guys like Danny Lopez and Bobby Chacon over Tito. That's about all I need to read to see your objectivity.

[Rebel]

Originally posted by Valdosta:

Trinidad also didn't get bitchslapped by Junior Jones (twice). When he fought the inferior fighters he always won. Also, whether people like it or not Tito will always own the "W" ove ODLH. MAB isn't ahead of Tito (yet). Yeah Trinidad got bitchslapped once and retired. Barrera, on the other hand, went on to reaffirm himself as a P4Per and great fighter despite those two losses. He came back better than ever after those two losses.

[Valdosta]

Originally posted by Rebel:

Yeah Trinidad got bitchslapped once and retired. Barrera, on the other hand, went on to reaffirm himself as a P4Per and great fighter despite those two losses. He came back better than ever after those two losses. Compare the difference in age and accomplishments when they lost smile.gif

[Valentino]

Originally posted by Erratic:
I will.

Maybe we can hook up the next time we are in your part of town. graemlins/beer.gif Maybe the Jefesito can sit down and ask you NOT to embarrass him *by making a fool of yourself*.

Barrera better than Tito? Shit...I forgot that Junior Jones was greater than Hopkins.

[Valentino]

Originally posted by Valdosta:

MAB isn't ahead of Tito (yet). And he will never be.

The only Latino fighter fighting today that has a chance is Morales. Because he can move UP and fight the likes of Mayweather Jr., etc.

Morales has the potential (and the competition) to become a top 10 Latino all time great.

Barrera already MAX OUT at 126.

Another thing...Rebz picked then TOP 10 p4per AZTEC WARRIOR to beat Tito. Tito make of that guy a BUM.

Tito also defeated ODLH (made him disgrace himself...)

[Valentino]

Originally posted by Rebel:

Barrera should have 1 legit victory over Morales. That's a bigger win than any one win Trinidad has on his record. We all know the DLH fight wasn't legit, it was a gift decision. Barrera does have a case for being Trinidad's equal IMO. In the eyes of most, he's convincingly defeated two top P4Pers in the last several years. Trinidad can't say the same. Villomar Fernandez CLEARLY defeated PRIME Arguello.

Sal, Barrera, or Tito can't say the same. Maybe we should rank Fernandez above ALL of them.

Shit...now that I think about it...De Jesus beat (clearly) the BEST P4P fighter and best Latino fighter to ever live. And he did that to a PRIME Duran.

We should rank De Jesus above ALL of them.

Here is a fact...Barrera is not comparable to Trinidad at this stage of his career. And by the look of it, he will never be.

Trinidad's Junior Jones was Oba Carr. And he make Oba Carr a journeyman.

[ March 30, 2003, 05:14 PM: Message edited by: Valentino ]

[Valentino]

Originally posted by Rebel:

Yeah Trinidad got bitchslapped once and retired. Barrera, on the other hand, went on to reaffirm himself as a P4Per and great fighter despite those two losses. He came back better than ever after those two losses. So did Hagler and Spinks. Are you telling me that Barrera is better than Hagler and Spinks?

He is not. Barrera is in the level of Canizales.

Great fighter during his prime. But not all time great. Not yet.

[Valentino]

Now...let me be fair with Barrera.

He can DOMINATE the featherweight division like Hopkins did the Middleweight. That can put him upthere.

And he can move up and challenge himself against the Popo and Castillo and even a larger Morales...

So, NO...I'm not going to give up on him YET.

But fighting Kelly next is not a Tito's type of accomplishment. No after his biggest two fights (Morales and Hamed).

[Valdosta]

Originally posted by Valentino:
Now...let me be fair with Barrera.

He can DOMINATE the featherweight division like Hopkins did the Middleweight. That can put him upthere.

And he can move up and challenge himself against the Popo and Castillo and even a larger Morales...

So, NO...I'm not going to give up on him YET.


But fighting Kelly next is not a Tito's type of accomplishment. No after his biggest two fights (Morales and Hamed). Which is exactly why I said he isn't on par with Tito (yet). There's no telling what could happen in his career. Maybe he wipes out 126 and 130 or , maybe he fights Gainer or Larios next (after Kelly) and losses. graemlins/lol.gif

[Erratic]

Originally posted by Valentino:

Maybe the Jefesito can sit down and ask you NOT to embarrass him *by making a fool of yourself*.

Barrera better than Tito? Shit...I forgot that Junior Jones was greater than Hopkins. LOL...All right Valentine...

Old man you need to get off your high horse. Stop trying to act like a boxing guru cuz you "lived" thru the era. I never proclaim to know more than i do, and never claim that what i say is gospel. Boxing is a subjective sport, I've given you my OPINIONS and reasons and you are yet to provide me (a young cat who "don't know shit" according to you) with a valid reason for Tito being a top 10 Latino. And when you go on telling me that Tito is great cuz of fights against Yori Boy, Carr and Camacho!!! That really shows me either you are COMPLETELY BIASED or completely Ignorant.(Personally I just think you are biased and not ignorant)

That being said...You lived thru it all and have seen different perspectives of fights, I respect that...But tell me this...What is Tito's most significant win/fight?

[Erratic]

I said Barrera will someday be a top 10er on my list...He still hasn't been forced into retirement. And to me is already greater than Tito. I am living thru their era man so I know!!!

[Valentino]

Originally posted by Erratic:
I said Barrera will someday be a top 10er on my list...He still hasn't been forced into retirement. And to me is already greater than Tito. I am living thru their era man so I know!!! That SOMBRERO...dude. That sombrero.

LOL.

Barrera is NOT even greater than Gomez or Zarate!

[Rebel]

Originally posted by Valentino:

That SOMBRERO...dude. That sombrero.

LOL.

Barrera is NOT even greater than Gomez or Zarate! He's not so blind bro. Think about it. Has Tito ever defeated anyone greater than Hamed and Erik Morales? I'm not saying Barrera is greater than Tito. All I'm saying is that it is debatable.

Not to mention that Barrera is more versatile than the one-dimensional Tito. ;)

[ March 30, 2003, 08:45 PM: Message edited by: Rebel ]

[Valdosta]

Originally posted by Rebel:

He's not so blind bro. Think about it. Has Tito ever defeated anyone greater than Hamed and Erik Morales?

Not to mention that Barrera is more versatile than the one-dimensional Tito. ;) Tito also never lost to a fighter on Junior Jones's level. Also smile.gif , according to you Hamed was never that good. Always overrated. Did Hamed ever truly belong in a PFP list? Nope.

[SuperJ]

Originally posted by Valdosta:

Tito also never lost to a fighter on Junior Jones's level. Also smile.gif , according to you Hamed was never that good. Always overrated. Did Hamed ever truly belong in a PFP list? Nope. Augie Sanchez knocked him down. graemlins/lol.gif

[g-man]

the only reason barrera lost to junior was the style..
that's it...
junior wasnt BETTER..just had his number ...period.

same as barkley over hearns..
barkley wasnt nessesarily better..just had his number...

[Valdosta]

Originally posted by Hell...:
the only reason barrera lost to junior was the style..
that's it...
junior wasnt BETTER..just had his number ...period.

same as barkley over hearns..
barkley wasnt nessesarily better..just had his number... Much different situations. Hearns was WAY over his prime weight class (by 21-28 pounds) and never took a good punch. MAB wasn't past his best weight. No excuses.

[ March 30, 2003, 08:54 PM: Message edited by: Valdosta ]

[TIP]

Originally posted by dmille:

He blew out a guy with only 17 fights? Who was 1-1-1 in his last three fights including a SIX round decision loss? Who had gone 10 rounds only once, in that draw?

What was he WHEN they fought? Instead of fighting the guy who was gonna win the junior fly title two years later, why wasn't he fighting the guys who held that title at the time?

Then again Carbajal did have 27 fights, not 17, while Gonzalez had 37. So I guess maybe it is understandable why he didn't fight them. Better to build up an "impressive" ledger against novices than to take on guys that were proven. How bad is a fighter that wins 26 in a row after a loss? Chiquita was 29 and had two W's over Carbajal when Saman beat him. The reason as I understand it, why Lopez didn't move up in weight untill he aged was that he had trouble gaining weight. May sound strange but there some people like that (wish I were one). I never held it against Pep, Hagler, Monzon etc... for not moving up and I don't hold it against Lopez either. TIP

[Rebel]

Originally posted by Valdosta:

Tito also never lost to a fighter on Junior Jones's level. Also smile.gif , according to you Hamed was never that good. Always overrated. Did Hamed ever truly belong in a PFP list? Nope. Based on the good fighters that Hamed had beaten, he was deserving of a p4p spot, just not the top 3 spot like many of his groupies claimed. graemlins/drunk.gif

The fact is that Hamed and Morales (1st fight)were both pretty good favorites against Barrera when he faced them, and he proved everyone wrong.

[ March 30, 2003, 09:49 PM: Message edited by: Rebel ]

[Valdosta]

Originally posted by Rebel:

Based on the good fighters that Hamed had beaten, he was deserving of a p4p spot, just not the top 3 spot like many of his groupies claimed. graemlins/drunk.gif

The fact is that Hamed and Morales (1st fight)were both pretty good favorites against Barrera when he faced them, and he proved everyone wrong. No, looking back at Hamed he was ceretainly a fraud. He always fought little guys, guys with no chins and guys with limited power. Personally, it look like Hamed was nothing but HBO hype. Wouldn't you agree?? Well, you would agree normally, but since it doesn't suit your argument you won't ;)

[neil]

after arce KOs the mendoza-alvarez III winner, morel pacheco winner, munoz, montiel, sahaprom, and rafa marquez he will be the greatest latino ever.

[g-man]

randall had chavez #
barrera is got morales #
holyfield had tysons#
mosley is got dlh's #
barkley had hearns #
etc, etc..

junior jones had barrera's #...prime time or not...

[Valdosta]

Originally posted by Hell...:
randall had chavez #
barrera is got morales #
holyfield had tysons#
mosley is got dlh's #
barkley had hearns #
etc, etc..

junior jones had barrera's #...prime time or not... Chavez was past prime, MAB-Morales are 1-1, Holyfield is just better than Tyson, we will have to wait after the Mosley-ODLH RE to determine that, Hearns was way past prime. JJ beating MAB counts against him when determing his place in history. That's just how it is. Tito fought several different styles and only lost to 1 great fighter. As far as I am concerned Tito is higher for now. If MAB accomplishes some more that could change I guess.

[ March 30, 2003, 11:35 PM: Message edited by: Valdosta ]

[Rebel]

Originally posted by Hell...:
randall had chavez #
barrera is got morales #
holyfield had tysons#
mosley is got dlh's #
barkley had hearns #
etc, etc..

junior jones had barrera's #...prime time or not... Barrera has Morales' number? Do you not recall Morales getting robbed in the rematch? Well that's what most individuals saw. My own mother thought he got robbed. graemlins/lol.gif

[Erratic]

Originally posted by Valentino:

That SOMBRERO...dude. That sombrero.

LOL.

Barrera is NOT even greater than Gomez or Zarate! That flag in your avatar dude...that flag.wait isn't it supposed to be snapped in half???

BTW...you still haven't answered my question.

[Erratic]

Originally posted by Valentino:
Olivarez was a fucking DRUNK. And Gomez was a "fucking" CRACKHEAD.

[Rebel]

Originally posted by Erratic:

And Gomez was a "fucking" CRACKHEAD. graemlins/lol.gif

[Remus]

Originally posted by Hell...:

barrera is got morales #
graemlins/headscratch.gif

[g-man]

like it or not..
barrera kicked morales ass in the first fight...the ropes were the only thing which kept him from goind\g down SEVERAL times per his own admission after the fight...

marco OUTBOXED morales in the second fight...
if he can kick his ass straight out, and outbox him also, that sounds very much to me that he has his #..... graemlins/mex.gif graemlins/dance.gif

[Rebel]

Originally posted by Hell...:
like it or not..
barrera kicked morales ass in the first fight...the ropes were the only thing which kept him from goind\g down SEVERAL times per his own admission after the fight...

marco OUTBOXED morales in the second fight...
if he can kick his ass straight out, and outbox him also, that sounds very much to me that he has his #..... graemlins/mex.gif graemlins/dance.gif G, take Barrera's nuts out of your mouth bro. Most boxing fans feel Morales was robbed in the 2nd fight. That is a fact. Even Barrera's corner told him he was losing going into the 12th. You're in denial.

[Muzseman]

G...

MAB's got Morales' number?

I hope you're talking about his cell phone number.

Morales won the rematch, MAB won the first bout.

The first bout was good enough to warrant a rematch regardless of who won.

Both guys elevated themselves that night and there's no shame in a loss for either man.

MAB had a few good late rounds in the rematch, but Morales won the bout. I think Morales won at least 5 of the first 6 rounds and won two of the last six...

Neither guy has the others number. They're evenly matched.

[ March 31, 2003, 09:57 AM: Message edited by: Supermosca ]

[g-man]

shit..I at least admit barrera LOST to valbuena (was it valbuena?) anyway... marco also LOST to jones...

rebs, the day you come clean and get out from under dlh's nutsack to admit he LOST to whitaker and IKE also...
that's the day I will maybe admit the second barrera fight with morales was closer than what was actually called as..
lol..
you don't have a leg to stand on, when it comes to kissing a fighters ass...(I at least have never, or will consider any fighter a ''GOD'' as you have proclaimed dlh to be in the past...
lol..
sad...
pathetic... :rolleyes: :D

[ March 31, 2003, 10:11 AM: Message edited by: Hell... ]

[mex fighter]

dlh had chavez's number. :D

[Muzseman]

Originally posted by mex fighter:
dlh had chavez's number. :D He found it in a senior citizen's home...that's why they fought.

[g-man]

yup..dlh had an OLD/SHOT/OVER-THE-HILL chavez number...
prime time chavez (circa rosario/camacho) would have kicked the best version of dlh ass there was (superlightweight) to say otherwise is just plain dumb...

[Rebel]

Originally posted by Hell...:
shit..I at least admit barrera LOST to valbuena (was it valbuena?) anyway... marco also LOST to jones...

rebs, the day you come clean and get out from under dlh's nutsack to admit he LOST to whitaker and IKE also...
that's the day I will maybe admit the second barrera fight with morales was closer than what was actually called as..
lol..
you don't have a leg to stand on, when it comes to kissing a fighters ass...(I at least have never, or will consider any fighter a ''GOD'' as you have proclaimed dlh to be in the past...
lol..
sad...
pathetic... :rolleyes: :D You worship a shitload of quitters, convicts, and drunks. Some of these guys you do consider Gods. graemlins/crazy.gif smile.gif

[Rebel]

Originally posted by Hell...:
yup..dlh had an OLD/SHOT/OVER-THE-HILL chavez number...
prime time chavez (circa rosario/camacho) would have kicked the best version of dlh ass there was (superlightweight) to say otherwise is just plain dumb... I disagree. DLH would've never been an easy fight for Chavez. DLH was much faster and had better all-around skills. It would come down to DLH taking a pounding to the body. I think Chavez would've won but it would've been damn close with Chavez losing a grip of the early rounds. Roger Mayweather was practically shutting him out before the beating began in the 2nd fight.

[ March 31, 2003, 11:58 AM: Message edited by: Rebel ]

[neil]

dont let g fool you, at the fight live he said Morales Barrera II should have been a draw.

[g-man]

mind you, I wasnt close enough as the judges in the actual fight, I was far away, trying to focus my camera to not miss a shot..it wasn't until I saw the first 3 rounds on tv back home...
that I realized barrera did beat morales and it wasn't even a draw...

the first three rounds were the key rounds, most people thought morales won them..but didn't...
morales missed most of the shots as he was countered by barrera on the inside..the proof is on how morales face looked (all busted up ) after three rounds of action...
barrera won. period.

as to dlh....I never said chavez would have easily defeated dlh in his prime..but he would have one way or another...
AND I don't worship anyone, I don't call anyone a ''god'' as you do...
and for you to call a guy who bought-himself a statutory rape conviction,RAN in his biggest fight up to that date, and has virtually backstabbed everyone he has dealt with with,is
shameful..
and don't pull that... ''I was only kidding'' crap in regards to you calling dlh your ''GOD''
you did it a couple of times..and you know you meant it...
shameful.. graemlins/barf.gif
don't try and twist things around and passing it off to me..
lol..
ridiculous..

[ March 31, 2003, 12:58 PM: Message edited by: Hell... ]

[dmille]

Originally posted by TIP:How bad is a fighter that wins 26 in a row after a loss? Chiquita was 29 and had two W's over Carbajal when Saman beat him. The reason as I understand it, why Lopez didn't move up in weight untill he aged was that he had trouble gaining weight. May sound strange but there some people like that (wish I were one). I never held it against Pep, Hagler, Monzon etc... for not moving up and I don't hold it against Lopez either. TIP Like I said "what was he WHEN they fought?". I like the way you ducked the question.

Trouble gaining weight? Last time I looked, 105 was below the 108 limit. If you think that 3 pounds would have made that much of a difference, then maybe you are over-rating Lopez.

And I think it is laughable to compare a junior/junior division that has only been around since 1987 to the featherweight and middleweight divisions.

[ April 01, 2003, 09:56 AM: Message edited by: dmille ]

[dmille]

Originally posted by Valentino:Based on styles. I'm talking about PRIME Pedroza...the MOVER with uncanny stanima. Not the one that fought the Irish.

Besides, Sanchez was far from "unbeatable". Or at least that is the recollection of I had of him (it appears he has become some kind of SUPER MAN years after his death). The kid was vulnerable to certain styles.

I see Pedroza (+ dirty tactics) fight with Sanchez unfolding like Hopkins-Trinidad.

I do rate Sanchez HIGHER in boxing history by the way. But it is about styles.

I never liked Pedroza...but there is no denial...the man knew how to win.Vunerable to certain styles? Which ones were those?

SO Pedroza knew how to win, did he? What did Sal do, make a career of losing?

Pedroza made his career by feasting on the leftovers of Marcel, Gomez, Arguello, Little Red and Sanchez.

Pedroza a mover? I remember how Sal's body attack took the legs away from another mover in Patrick Ford.

I also remember how Bernard Taylor boxed circles around Pedroza. Sal may not have been as fast as Taylor, but he was much stronger and a harder puncher.

Sanchez as Tito vs Pedroza as Hopkins? You really think that Sal was that one-dimensional? I never bought into all the discussion of your anti-Mexican-fighter bias before. Now I wonder...

I would have loved to have seen him try some low blows on Sal. Gomez got Sanchez' blood boiling and we saw the results.

[Rebel]

Originally posted by Hell...:
mind you, I wasnt close enough as the judges in the actual fight, I was far away, trying to focus my camera to not miss a shot..it wasn't until I saw the first 3 rounds on tv back home...
that I realized barrera did beat morales and it wasn't even a draw...

the first three rounds were the key rounds, most people thought morales won them..but didn't...
morales missed most of the shots as he was countered by barrera on the inside..the proof is on how morales face looked (all busted up ) after three rounds of action...
barrera won. period.
Let me guess, you watched each round in slow motion again, right? :rolleyes: graemlins/drunk.gif

[el patron]

Originally posted by Rebel:

Let me guess, you watched each round in slow motion again, right? :rolleyes: graemlins/drunk.gif And of course the old "if his face looks swollen he must've lost" arguement.

[g-man]

nope, this time it was quite clear..
in real time, barrera made morales miss, and at the end of 3 rounds morales face was all fucked up again...
barrera beat him both times..period.

[ March 31, 2003, 10:18 PM: Message edited by: Hell... ]

[el patron]

Originally posted by Hell...:
mope, this time it was quite clear..
in real time, barrera made morales miss, and at the end of 3 rounds morales face was all fucked up again...
barrera beat him both times..period. they're 1-1 against eachother. period.

[g-man]

yeah, and if you believe that, then tito did beat dlh also...
tito 1 win over ZERO for dlh..
lol..

[el patron]

Originally posted by Hell...:
yeah, and if you believe that, then tito did beat dlh also...
tito 1 win over ZERO for dlh..
lol.. Well I say the same thing to you for somehow thinking marco won the rematch.

have you been smoking the "funny" shit? graemlins/lol.gif

[ March 31, 2003, 06:49 PM: Message edited by: el patron ]

[mex fighter]

Originally posted by Hell...:
yup..dlh had an OLD/SHOT/OVER-THE-HILL chavez number...
prime time chavez (circa rosario/camacho) would have kicked the best version of dlh ass there was (superlightweight) to say otherwise is just plain dumb... wasn't chumpvez the champ the first time they fought?

[Punchy]

Originally posted by Rebel:

G, take Barrera's nuts out of your mouth bro. Most boxing fans feel Morales was robbed in the 2nd fight. That is a fact. Even Barrera's corner told him he was losing going into the 12th. You're in denial. See? i won that comp ages ago... i picked Morales to win a close one, but to get robbed with Barrera getting the dec. remember?
:D

[Valentino]

Originally posted by Rebel:

He's not so blind bro. Think about it. Has Tito ever defeated anyone greater than Hamed and Erik Morales? I'm not saying Barrera is greater than Tito. All I'm saying is that it is debatable.

Not to mention that Barrera is more versatile than the one-dimensional Tito. ;) I remember you ranking Hamed in the lower tier of your P4P list, and Vargas in your top 5 P4P.

So, yes...he defeated a greater fighter. And he defeated (and humillated, by making him run) ODLH.

Worst yet...has Tito lost to a fighter of the caliber of Junior Jones (twice)?

[Valentino]

Originally posted by Hell...:
randall had chavez #
barrera is got morales #
holyfield had tysons#
mosley is got dlh's #
barkley had hearns #
etc, etc..

junior jones had barrera's #...prime time or not... And Hopkins had Tito's
And Sanchez had Gomez

WAIT, WAIT...they were Puerto Ricans, so the "had their #" argument doesn't apply with them.

[Rebel]

Originally posted by Hell...:
mope, this time it was quite clear..
in real time, barrera made morales miss, and at the end of 3 rounds morales face was all fucked up again...
barrera beat him both times..period. Explain why Barrera's own corner told him he was losing going into the 12th. Let's hear it.

[Erratic]

Originally posted by Valentino:
And he defeated (and humillated, by making him run) ODLH.

Do you really believe that?


Oh ... so are you saying Tito's most significant win* was over DLH?

[Rebel]

Originally posted by Valentino:

I remember you ranking Hamed in the lower tier of your P4P list, and Vargas in your top 5 P4P.

So, yes...he defeated a greater fighter. And he defeated (and humillated, by making him run) ODLH.

Worst yet...has Tito lost to a fighter of the caliber of Junior Jones (twice)? Now you're rewriting history. LOL

I never had Vargas that high. I do recall having him as high as #8-9 at one point.

DLH ran for 3 rds but that doesn't erase what happened for the first 9. Take a look at my avatar. He had Tito bleeding, with his trunks all bloody, and desperate. DLH sure did fuck up that night. All he had to do was step it up in the 9th and he could've finished him off. Would've, could've, should've, I know, I know. Both fighters embarrassed themselves that night. Oscar for running and Tito for looking robotic and one-dimensional for the full 12 rds.

[ March 31, 2003, 09:23 PM: Message edited by: Rebel ]

[g-man]

barrera's corner told him that so he wouldn't coast in the 12th..and not do the stupidity which dlh did vs tito for the last four rounds of their ''fight of the millenium''non-fight.....

as to the mex comment...which part of A PRIME CHAVEZ didn't you understand son?

barrera beat morales both ways there's is to do it already... graemlins/dance.gif

[ March 31, 2003, 10:24 PM: Message edited by: Hell... ]

[Valdosta]

Originally posted by Erratic:

Do you really believe that?


Oh ... so are you saying Tito's most significant win* was over DLH? I always find it funny how ODLH nut huggers love to degrade Tito's win over him. Yet, in other controversial decisions (Whitaker, and especially Quartey), they seem to think that ODLH deserved the wins. Yes, Tito's win over ODLH was the biggest of his career. Whether or not ODLH nut huggers like it or not, Tito got the "w".

[g-man]

just shows the true double standards they have..the ones they love to accuse me of.... graemlins/barf.gif

[ April 01, 2003, 08:52 AM: Message edited by: Hell... ]

[Xplosive]

Originally posted by Valdosta:

I always find it funny how ODLH nut huggers love to degrade Tito's win over him. Yet, in other controversial decisions (Whitaker, and especially Quartey), they seem to think that ODLH deserved the wins. Yes, Tito's win over ODLH was the biggest of his career. Whether or not ODLH nut huggers like it or not, Tito got the "w". graemlins/nod.gif graemlins/thumb.gif

[el patron]

Originally posted by Hell...:
barrera beat morales both ways there's is to do it already... graemlins/dance.gif He sure did. The two ways he beat him were, one legit and one robbery.

[Mark G]

Originally posted by Hell...:


marco OUTBOXED morales in the second fight...
if he can kick his ass straight out, and outbox him also, that sounds very much to me that he has his #..... graemlins/mex.gif graemlins/dance.gif I was surprised as hell when they announced that second fight for Barrera.

[Joonie73]

I guess we at least agree on Chavez. My list:

1. Roberto Duran
2. Eder Jofre
3. Salvador Sanchez
4. Alexis Arguello
5. Carlos Monzon
6. Pascual Perez
7. Miguel Canto
8. Vicente Saldivar
9. Carlos Zarate
10. Ruben Olivares



Originally posted by dmille:
1) Eder Jofre
2) Carlos Monzon
3) Roberto Duran
4) Pascual Perez
5) Manuel Ortiz
6) Miguel Canto
7) Panama Al Brown
8) Vicente Saldivar
9) Salvador Sanchez
10) Ruben Olivares

Honorable mention: Alexis Arguello, Wilfred Benitez, Victor Galindez, Kid Gavilan, Jose Napoles, Carlos Zarate

[ December 14, 2003, 08:31 AM: Message edited by: Joonie73 ]

[Joonie73]

TIP, I ordinarily respect your opinion very much but Saman's junior flyweight opposition was doggone awful. You cannot simply list a guy's won & loss record & assert that he was great. Saman would have been a perennial contender at best in the mid-80s to early 90s. He likely wouldn't even make top 10 junior flyweight on my list & no one in Asia considers him in the class of Chang, Zapata, Carbajal, Chiquita, Yuh or even Gushiken. In fact, his name NEVER comes up when Asian experts discuss all-time junior flyweight greats.


Originally posted by TIP:

Lopez blew out a guy (Sorjataurong) who went 26-0 after the Lopez loss. Saman ko'd Gonzales for the title and had 10 defenses during this time before losing to Choi. TIP

[ December 14, 2003, 08:42 AM: Message edited by: Joonie73 ]

[Joonie73]

The combined record in world junior flyweight/flyweight title bouts of Saman's challengers:

0-19-1

I rest my case.

[Boxing Freak]

1. Duran
2. Monzon
3. Chavez
4.Trinidad
5.Sanchez
6.Jofre
7.Gomez
8.Arguello
9.Benitez
10.Carlos Ortiz

[ericjw]

Originally posted by dmille:

show me ten all-time great fighters that won both junior and traditional weight titles whose primes were at the junior weight. You will still be hard pressed to come up with five all-timers.
Here's five:

Evander Holyfield
Roy Jones
J.C. Chavez
Alexis Arguello
Wilfredo Gomez

I think we can agree that Super Middle and Cruiserweight are in the category of non-traditional weight classes just as the junior divisions.

You can also make arguments for:

James Toney
Thomas Hearns
Felix Trinidad
Floyd Mayweather Jr. (an all-timer in the making)
Oscar De La Hoya

[Rebel]

Thanks for bringing this thread back to life Joonie.

Unlike Dmille, I don't fault fighters for chillin' in non-traditional weight classes. We're in Modern times now. I'm sure that if all of today's junior divisions would've existed back then, many of the old-timers would've resided there also. Let's get with the times. I don't see anything wrong with putting a bit more emphasis on fighters who dominated several original eight divisions but I think it's unfair to penalize great fighters who spent a lot of time in non-traditional divisions.

Below is my list. This is strictly subjective based on what I have seen.

1. Roberto Duran
2. Julio Cesar Chavez
3. Carlos Monzon
4. Eder Jofre
5. Salvador Sanchez
6. Alexis Arguello
7. Vicente Saldivar
8. Ricardo Lopez
9. Jose Napoles
10. Pascual Perez

Next in Line: Miguel Canto, Carlos Ortiz, Carlos Zarate, Ruben Olivares

[ December 22, 2003, 12:54 AM: Message edited by: Rebel ]

[Rebel]

I have a problem in assessing Jofre. I have him at #4 but I could easily see him at #6. I'm not as impressed with him like others are. I guess I'm in the minority.

[ December 22, 2003, 12:53 AM: Message edited by: Rebel ]

[Rebel]

Originally posted by neil:
el puas is olivares.

dmille, why does a guy have to be top 17 just because he's the best in a division? why does a guy have to be top 8 because he's the best in a traditional division?

cant one division be stronger than another? cant one notoriously stronger division have as many as 1000 guys better than the best in another weaker division? I had to highlight this post. You make a great point. For example, the number #5 fighter at lightweight could conceivably be #1 or 2 at flyweight. This is just an example. I'm not saying this is the case. But you get what I'm saying. Some divisions are deeper than others and loaded with a lot of greats unlike other divisions where the greatness is more dense.

[dmille]

Originally posted by ericjw:

Here's five:

Evander Holyfield
Roy Jones
J.C. Chavez
Alexis Arguello
Wilfredo Gomez

I think we can agree that Super Middle and Cruiserweight are in the category of non-traditional weight classes just as the junior divisions.

You can also make arguments for:

James Toney
Thomas Hearns
Felix Trinidad
Floyd Mayweather Jr. (an all-timer in the making)
Oscar De La Hoya I agree with you only on Arguello and Gomez.

[dmille]

Originally posted by Rebel:
Unlike Dmille, I don't fault fighters for chillin' in non-traditional weight classes. We're in Modern times now. I'm sure that if all of today's junior divisions would've existed back then, many of the old-timers would've resided there also. Let's get with the times. I don't see anything wrong with putting a bit more emphasis on fighters who dominated several original eight divisions but I think it's unfair to penalize great fighters who spent a lot of time in non-traditional divisions.They were around. But the most established (130 and 140) sat vacant for decades. If those divisions are to be considered as equally legit, why didn't anyone claim these titles?

[Valentino]

Originally posted by ericjw:

Here's five:

Evander Holyfield
Roy Jones
J.C. Chavez
Alexis Arguello
Wilfredo Gomez

I think we can agree that Super Middle and Cruiserweight are in the category of non-traditional weight classes just as the junior divisions.

You can also make arguments for:

James Toney
Thomas Hearns
Felix Trinidad
Floyd Mayweather Jr. (an all-timer in the making)
Oscar De La Hoya Toney has to be the MOST overrated fighter of the last 30 years.

I mean, my question is: what GREAT (prime) fighter did he defeat?

Or better yet?how impressive was his reign?

More importantly?who he LOST too?

Chiquita Gonzalez was CONSIDERABLY greater than Toney?and I don?t see people mentioning him.

Toney is a guy that looks great in the gym (against a bunch of taxi drivers). But the Tiberi and Griffin of this word have not problem making him look like the FAT-FUCK he is.

[dmille]

Originally posted by Valentino:
Toney is a guy that looks great in the gym (against a bunch of taxi drivers). But the Tiberi and Griffin of this wor[l]d have no problem making him look like the FAT-FUCK he is. Were those taxi drivers from Tijuana?

Seemed like Holy and Jirov did have problems with him.

[lefthooker]

Originally posted by dmille:

Were those taxi drivers from Tijuana?

Seemed like Holy and Jirov did have problems with him. dmille,
Holy had one foot in the grave so it's not as if Toney beat the 'real' Real Deal.
Jirov is the best win on his record other than Nunn, but neither of those guys will ever be referred to as 'greats'.
The only prime great Toney ever fought ( RJJ) flat out embarrassed him IMO.
The Tijuana remark is , no doubt, a shot at Chavez.
Like any fighter with 100+ fights, there will be some fodder on his record, but the guy fought a hell of a lot of legit contenders too - in 4 weight classes ( I wouldn't rank him at all at 147 - his worse weight IMO, too small - overall I think JCC is genuinely underappreciated on this board.

[Rebel]

Originally posted by dmille:

They were around. But the most established (130 and 140) sat vacant for decades. If those divisions are to be considered as equally legit, why didn't anyone claim these titles? Obviously they weren't as highly regarded back then. That's really changed over the years, hasn't it? I say, let's get with the times and judge fighters accordingly. The 130 and 140 pound divisions have come a long way.

Take a look at your list. When your criteria ranks someone like Victor Galindez over Julio Cesar Chavez, there is a need for serious re-evaluation IMO.

[ December 23, 2003, 10:08 AM: Message edited by: Rebel ]

[Rebel]

Originally posted by dmille:

Were those taxi drivers from Tijuana?

Seemed like Holy and Jirov did have problems with him. Taxi drivers? You mean the first 40 fighters that Chavez fought as a kid in a tough as nails boxing circuit? Considering that he turned pro at 17 with 15 amateur fights under his belt, I don't think it's shame to fight tough journeyman on the way up.

Are you going to tell me that Willie Pep's first 40 fights were against great fighters?

I can name many fighters who began their careers fighting lesser fighters when they first started off. It's part of the building experience process. We saw it in the old days and we see still see it today.

[ December 23, 2003, 10:10 AM: Message edited by: Rebel ]

[Valentino]

To Dmille?s credit?he SOMETIMES is open minded. I was able to debate with him on the issue of Benitez. Weeks later I saw Benitez in his list.

Incidentally, my debate took place in ESPN forum (with microphones). Funny thing, because it is more difficult for me to express myself verbally (English been my second language), especially with somebody like Dmille that RARELY allows the other person to speak (LOL).

I will eventually convert him to Chavez.

[The Hitman]

Originally posted by dmille:

Vunerable to certain styles? Which ones were those?

SO Pedroza knew how to win, did he? What did Sal do, make a career of losing?

Pedroza made his career by feasting on the leftovers of Marcel, Gomez, Arguello, Little Red and Sanchez.

Pedroza a mover? I remember how Sal's body attack took the legs away from another mover in Patrick Ford.

I also remember how Bernard Taylor boxed circles around Pedroza. Sal may not have been as fast as Taylor, but he was much stronger and a harder puncher.

Sanchez as Tito vs Pedroza as Hopkins? You really think that Sal was that one-dimensional? I never bought into all the discussion of your anti-Mexican-fighter bias before. Now I wonder...

I would have loved to have seen him try some low blows on Sal. Gomez got Sanchez' blood boiling and we saw the results. fantastic fucking post regarding a sanchez-pedroza matchup. hopefully you posted something similar to this in the mythical matchups forum when this match came up a while back...

Hitman

[The Hitman]

when the hell did this debate get going? real good reading.... very interesting all around. here is my list for what its worth:


1 Duran
2 Jofre
3 Monzon
4 Arguello
5 Perez
6 Canto
7 Saldivar
8 Chavez
9 Ortiz
10 Sanchez

Hitman

[Valentino]

Originally posted by Hitman:

fantastic fucking post regarding a sanchez-pedroza matchup. hopefully you posted something similar to this in the mythical matchups forum when this match came up a while back...

Hitman How many fighters did Sal fought overseas?

Another thing?we are not talking about ?prime? Sal vs. ?prime? Eusebio. Both fighters were contemporaries. And due to styles and high, Pedroza would have given Sal serious problems.

Another thing, Sal did have trouble against movers. Even his biggest fans know that. And there is a parallel between Sal, Arguello, and Trinidad: All three had some level of difficulty against movers and all three possessed uncanny stamina.

Pedroza also had great stamina and knew how to win.

[Valentino]

He also beat the Jorge Lujans, Rocky Lockridge, Cabo and Juan Laportes of this World. He went to South Korea, Italy, the USA, Venezuela, UK, etc. to fight at his opponents? backyards.

Not an easy task.

[dmille]

Originally posted by Lefthooker:
dmille,
The Tijuana remark is, no doubt, a shot at Chavez.That remark was a "jab" at Val (a non-Mexican) using referring to certain fighters as taxi drivers when most boxing fans still remember Haugen's remark.

[Valentino]

Originally posted by dmille:

That remark was a "jab" at Val (a non-Mexican) using referring to certain fighters as taxi drivers when most boxing fans still remember Haugen's remark. People that already know me?know that I don?t care about nationality when it comes to boxing.

Two of my top 3 favorite fighters are not from Puerto Rico (Chavez and Arguello).

And currently, I rank three Mexican Nationals and one Mexican American in my top 10 P4P (Morales, Marquez, Barrera, and ODLH).

[dmille]

Originally posted by Valentino:
How many fighters did Sal fought overseas?

Another thing…we are not talking about “prime” Sal vs. “prime” Eusebio. Both fighters were contemporaries. And due to styles and high, Pedroza would have given Sal serious problems.

Another thing, Sal did have trouble against movers. Even his biggest fans know that. And there is a parallel between Sal, Arguello, and Trinidad: All three had some level of difficulty against movers and all three possessed uncanny stamina.

Pedroza also had great stamina and knew how to win. Overseas? He didn't do like Virgil Hill or Dariusz. His fights were not all in his hometown. That question is BS.

Describe the trouble that Pedroza's style would have given Sal. I cited specific fights from both their careers in my post.

Who are these movers that gave Sanchez so much trouble? Don't just say he had trouble with movers. What fights are you referring to?

Seems to me that Pedroza had some trouble with a mover named Bernard Taylor. When are you gonna deal with that issue?

And there is that phrase again: "Pedroza...knew how to win." What is this supposed to mean? That Sal didn't know how to win? That he knew how to lose?

[Valentino]

Dmille...I like you. Therefore, I don't want to school you in this board.

Maybe we can debate this point in Yahoo.

I will show you the light.

[neil]

Originally posted by Valentino:
Dmille...I like you. Therefore, I don't want to school you in this board.

Maybe we can debate this point in Yahoo.

I will show you the light. be careful dmille, you dont want to mess with balki at "full strength"

[Valentino]

Originally posted by Neil:

be careful dmille, you dont want to mess with balki at "full strength" graemlins/sleeping.gif

[The Hitman]

Originally posted by Valentino:
Dmille...I like you. Therefore, I don't want to school you in this board.

Maybe we can debate this point in Yahoo.

I will show you the light. lamest post i have ever seen... talk about running away with your tail between your legs graemlins/lol.gif

Hitman

[neil]

balki did go out like a little bitch. It appears he doesnt want to tangle with Donald A. (for asshole) Miller.

[Rebel]

Dmille the asshole? Coming from you? graemlins/funny.gif

[neil]

did I st st stutter, muthafucker?

[dmille]

Originally posted by Valentino:
He also beat the Jorge Lujans, Rocky Lockridge, Cab[a] and Juan Laportes of this World. As I said before, Pedroza made a career of fighting the leftovers of Arguello & Gomez (Royal Kobayashi), Little Red (Jose Caba, Juan Malvarez), Marcel (Spider Nemoto) and Sanchez (Patrick Ford, Juan LaPorte).

[Rebel]

Originally posted by Neil:
did I st st stutter, muthafucker? Grow up dude. What is up your ass?

I've always been courteous to you up until the point that you began insulting various forum members on a regular basis. If you aren't happy here then why waste your time? Why continue to be bitter and project an image of immaturity and anger?

[The Hitman]

you have to chat with both on the microphones to get the difference between dmille and Neil. Neil's shenanigans are fun and colorful... dmille's shenanigans are cruel and harsh... which wouldn't make them shenanigans at all really........wtf was i saying?

Hitman

[dmille]

WHAT? I am a harmless little fuzzball.

[Rebel]

Originally posted by Hitman:
you have to chat with both on the microphones to get the difference between dmille and Neil. Neil's shenanigans are fun and colorful... dmille's shenanigans are cruel and harsh... which wouldn't make them shenanigans at all really........wtf was i saying?

Hitman Neil's, shenanigans don't seem fun and colorful on this forum. He's constantly rude towards members of this forum and he's never once said, "Rebel, I'm not really a dick. It's all an act."

[Valentino]

Originally posted by dmille:
WHAT? I am a harmless little fuzzball. Hey Don...did you move to Alabama or still living in Miami?

[Remus]

Originally posted by Hitman:
you have to chat with both on the microphones to get the difference between dmille and Neil. Neil's shenanigans are fun and colorful... i've always found his angry, dry humour hilarious. graemlins/lol.gif

[The Hitman]

Originally posted by dmille:
WHAT? I am a harmless little fuzzball. you yell at people

Hitman

[The Hitman]

Originally posted by Valentino:

Hey Don...did you move to Alabama or still living in Miami? iiiiiiiii thought it was louisiana....

Hitman

[The Hitman]

Originally posted by Rebel:

Neil's, shenanigans don't seem fun and colorful on this forum. He's constantly rude towards members of this forum and he's never once said, "Rebel, I'm not really a dick. It's all an act." well just look at him talking to mex fighter in the winky-shane thread.... unless they have had a major falling out recently.... those two get along very much quite nicely- i do well reckon they could enjoy an ice cold Steel Reserve while watching a fight together

Hitman

[ December 23, 2003, 10:26 PM: Message edited by: Hitman ]

[dmille]

Originally posted by Hitman:
I thought it was Louisiana.It was. Still in Miami.

[dmille]

Originally posted by Hitman:
you yell at people

Hitman I have a problem with people that talk sh!t when they don't know what they are talking about. I don't apologize for that to you or to anyone.

[The Hitman]

Originally posted by dmille:

I have a problem with people that talk sh!t when they don't know what they are talking about. I don't apologize for that to you or to anyone. i didn't ask for your apology i just labelled your shenanigans to be of a more cruel nature. :D

Hitman

[Rebel]

Originally posted by Remus:

i've always found his angry, dry humour hilarious. graemlins/lol.gif How would you like it if you were a new member of a forum and had some punk call you a stupid fuck because your opinion varies from his own?

[Rebel]

I know that dmille rubs some people the wrong way but he's always been respectful towards me and I towards him. We disagree on a lot of things but he never responds with something like, "Fuck you bitch. You're opinion don't mean shit fuck face."

One can exude brusqueness if that's part of their online schtick but at least add a dab of maturity to go along with it. Dmille does this very well. The decent gap between their ages must be the primary factor. In other words, dmille is a man and neil a kid.

[ December 24, 2003, 09:31 AM: Message edited by: Rebel ]

[mex fighter]

Originally posted by Rebel:

How would you like it if you were a new member of a forum and had some punk call you a stupid fuck because your opinion varies from his own? its only ok if he's part of "the club", i guess.

[dmille]

I think that too many take the things that others say WAAAAAAAAAAAAy TOO SERIOUSLY.

Neil says a lot of things that are loaded with irony and sarcasm. He can be a real wit (at least by half). BUT I don't take it as life or death.

As far as being "cruel" or "harsh"; someone starts in, they should be ready for a battle. Not only with me but with anyone.

I am not a golf fan. It ain't enuff to duck, I swing back.

And if someone doesn't want to get their feelings hurt, they should be in the mediation chat room.

[neil]

Zurita-lets face it, you are a clown. You're talking all this nonsense about maturity levels, yet I believe it was your bitch ass who was responsible for that whole "Robinson Garcia" charade to stir up racial tensions or just out of general cowardice. Im up front. If somebody doesnt know shit about boxing, they'll hear about it. No aliases.


Hardened serial killers like Dmille can deal with my comments, its just certain whiny pussies who fold under the heat and begin to moan. Do what you gotta do, psuedo historian, cuz I aint changing a damn thing.

[Rebel]

Originally posted by dmille:
I think that too many take the things that others say WAAAAAAAAAAAAy TOO SERIOUSLY.

Well if the receivers are misinterpreting his rudeness then he should let them know sometime. Am I suppose to sit around and allow him to insult every new member that pops up along with the current regulars whenever they post something he doesn't like? Not once have I ever been given the impression that he was anything but serious in his discourteous expressions. And I don't think he was being sarcastic last month when he snapped at me with an ingrained anger and asked me to ban him.

[Rebel]

Originally posted by Neil:
Zurita-lets face it, you are a clown. You're talking all this nonsense about maturity levels, yet I believe it was your bitch ass who was responsible for that whole "Robinson Garcia" charade to stir up racial tensions or just out of general cowardice. Im up front. If somebody doesnt know shit about boxing, they'll hear about it. No aliases.


Hardened serial killers like Dmille can deal with my comments, its just certain whiny pussies who fold under the heat and begin to moan. Do what you gotta do, psuedo historian, cuz I aint changing a damn thing. Robinson Garcia was a joke from about 2 years ago. You still haven't forgotten about that? And who are you to judge who knows boxing on this forum? Every individual on this forum has something to offer. I truly believe that.

Neil, all I'm asking you is to show some freakin' respect to the members of this forum. You're constantly rude and come across as some pseudo-boxing expert because you order many overseas fights that many of us in here don't care for. Fact is, you're an insecure kid that consistently insults members of this forum. You probably do that to mask the insecurities and grief that you suffer in your everyday life.

If you're going to dwell on something that happened two years ago, that's your call. No one else is dwelling on it. It's a rather desperate attempt on your part to even bring that up.

Listen, if you want to stay, I have no problem with that as long as you change your piss poor pompous attitude. Is that too much to ask for? How old are you again?

Can your "hardened" fat ass deal with my comments?

[ December 24, 2003, 03:30 PM: Message edited by: El-Terrible ]

[Joonie73]

Who is Robinson Garcia?


Originally posted by Rebel:

Robinson Garcia was a joke from about 2 years ago. You still haven't forgotten about that? And who are you to judge who knows boxing on this forum? Every individual on this forum has something to offer. I truly believe that.

Neil, all I'm asking you is to show some freakin' respect to the members of this forum. You're constantly rude and come across as some pseudo-boxing expert because you order many overseas fights that many of us in here don't care for. Fact is, you're an insecure kid that consistently insults members of this forum. You probably do that to mask the insecurities and grief that you suffer in your everyday life.

If you're going to dwell on something that happened two years ago, that's your call. No one else is dwelling on it. It's a rather desperate attempt on your part to even bring that up.

Listen, if you want to stay, I have no problem with that as long as you change your piss poor pompous attitude. Is that too much to ask for? How old are you again?

Can your "hardened" fat ass deal with my comments?

[neil]

Originally posted by Joonie73:
Who is Robinson Garcia?

Mr Maturity aka psuedo historian Napoleon Bonaputo did this little charade earlier this year, where he pretended to be an angry white man named "Robinson Garcia". He made several blatantly racist threads, particularly against black people.

and then when called out on it, banned most all the black members of the forum.

[ December 29, 2003, 03:49 PM: Message edited by: Neil ]

[Rebel]

Originally posted by Neil:

Mr Maturity aka psuedo historian Napoleon Bonaputo did this little charade earlier this year, where he pretended to be an angry white man named "Robinson Garcia". He made several blatantly racist threads, particularly against black people.

and then when called out on it, banned most all the black members of the forum. Is that the way you remember history? Pathetic. LOL

I created Robinson Garcia as a joke and dogged every ethnic group, particularly my own. You obviously weren't paying attention. People actually thought it was pretty funny. All was forgotten after the joke, which most members took to pretty well.

Months later, I banned Ropeadope for his Jew bashing, then I began to have problems with a few other members, one a RJJ nut hugger.

Whenever you need another history lesson let me know Chavelo Gueraputa.

[ December 29, 2003, 04:15 PM: Message edited by: Rebel ]

[Remus]

Originally posted by El Dandy Casanova:
1- Chavez
2- Duran
3- Trinidad
4- Arguello
5- ODLH
6- Monzon
7- Olivares
8- Benitez
9- Gomez
10- R. Lopez lol man oh man this is a bad list. graemlins/lol.gif

[neo_wolf]

Ino No order but i will name the 10 best Latino Fighters.
This is my opinion,if you dont like it then go fuck a duck and suck its nut.

Trinidad
Chavez
Sanchez
Benited
Gomez
Duran
Jofre
Monzon
Lopez(ricardo)
Carlos Ortiz

[Remus]

Originally posted by Mojo:
This is my opinion,that list is a list of you're FAVOURITE latino's. not the BEST latino's.

[Rebel]

Originally posted by Mojo:
Ino No order but i will name the 10 best Latino Fighters.
This is my opinion,if you dont like it then go fuck a duck and suck its nut.

Trinidad
Chavez
Sanchez
Benited
Gomez
Duran
Jofre
Monzon
Lopez(ricardo)
Carlos Ortiz Trinidad is the best Latino of all-time? graemlins/drunk.gif

DLH ranks higher P4P IMO.

[ February 10, 2004, 12:08 AM: Message edited by: Rebel ]

[Valdosta]

Originally posted by Rebel:

Trinidad is the best Latino of all-time? graemlins/drunk.gif

DLH ranks higher P4P IMO. Don't college teach you how to read?? graemlins/lol.gif Read the first 3 words of his post.

[Remus]

Originally posted by Valdosta:

Don't college teach you how to read?? graemlins/lol.gif Read the first 3 words of his post. i thought the same as rebel. tongue1.gif basically cos i know tito fans are generally retarded so i wasn't surprised at the list. :D

[Punchy]

Trinidad is greater than that wife-killing poofter Monzon. tongue1.gif

[Remus]

Originally posted by Punchy:
Trinidad is greater than that wife-killing poofter Monzon. tongue1.gif greater at running like a bitch after getting beaten. :D

[neo_wolf]

Originally posted by Rebel:

Trinidad is the best Latino of all-time? graemlins/drunk.gif

DLH ranks higher P4P IMO. I said in no order you Mexican Burrito! mex.gif

[Rebel]

Originally posted by Valdosta:

Don't college teach you how to read?? graemlins/lol.gif Read the first 3 words of his post. Well, I was confused because he left off Saldivar, Napoles, Arizmendi, and several others. All of those fighters were greater than Tito IMO.

[Rebel]

Originally posted by Mojo:

I said in no order you Mexican Burrito! mex.gif You left off some fighters that were greater than Trinidad. I'd rank the following fighters above Tito:

Miguel Canto
Vicente Saldivar
Baby Arizmendi
Carlos Zarate
Jose Napoles
Panama Al Brown
De La Hoya
Kid Gavilan
Pascual Perez

Many would also argue that Luis Rodriguez, Olivares, and several others were also greater.

If Erik Morales, is successful at 130-135, he too will rank higher on my list than Tito.

[ February 10, 2004, 10:16 AM: Message edited by: Rebel ]

[Valdosta]

Originally posted by Remus:

i thought the same as rebel. tongue1.gif Why am I not surprised graemlins/crazy.gif .... graemlins/lol.gif

[neil]

Trinidad had a greater career than De La Hoya has had so far. Maybe if DeLaHoya beat Hopkins then he could make a claim of being greater.

[neo_wolf]

Originally posted by Rebel:

You left off some fighters that were greater than Trinidad. I'd rank the following fighters above Tito:

Miguel Canto
Vicente Saldivar
Baby Arizmendi
Carlos Zarate
Jose Napoles
Panama Al Brown
De La Hoya
Kid Gavilan
Pascual Perez

Many would also argue that Luis Rodriguez, Olivares, and several others were also greater.

If Erik Morales, is successful at 130-135, he too will rank higher on my list than Tito. Sorry man but thats my list,Its what i really believe.

[Tam-Tam]

Originally posted by Rebel:

You left off some fighters that were greater than Trinidad. I'd rank the following fighters above Tito:

Miguel Canto
Vicente Saldivar
Baby Arizmendi
Carlos Zarate
Jose Napoles
Panama Al Brown
De La Hoya
Kid Gavilan
Pascual Perez

Many would also argue that Luis Rodriguez, Olivares, and several others were also greater.

If Erik Morales, is successful at 130-135, he too will rank higher on my list than Tito. Ruben and El Feo are better then a number of men you list in your "Id rank better then Tito" list IMO.

[Remus]

Originally posted by Valdosta:

Why am I not surprised graemlins/crazy.gif .... graemlins/lol.gif them's fightin words.