Julio Cesar Chavez

I Feel Fine · Post by **I Feel Fine** » 29 Feb 2008, 15:40

Boxing isn't a beauty contest. Whitaker clearly beat Chavez in their fight.

As for Chavez at 130... he had nine defenses and beat some of the better names in the division at the time. I'm not saying that I have Chavez #1 at 130, but I'm wondering if anyone does. There aren't too many fighters who are real candidates for best ever at two weight classes. Robinson at 147 and 160, but not many else.

ringsider · Post by **ringsider** » 29 Feb 2008, 17:07

I Feel Fine wrote:Boxing isn't a beauty contest. Whitaker clearly beat Chavez in their fight.

He didn't beat anybody....the fight was a draw.

dempseyfire · Post by **dempseyfire** » 29 Feb 2008, 17:52

ringsider wrote:
I Feel Fine wrote:Boxing isn't a beauty contest. Whitaker clearly beat Chavez in their fight.
He didn't beat anybody....the fight was a draw.

Right, and Courtney Burton beat Emmanuel Augustus . . .

ringsider · Post by **ringsider** » 29 Feb 2008, 17:59

And Marvin Hagler beat Sugar Ray Leonard too......

I Feel Fine · Post by **I Feel Fine** » 29 Feb 2008, 19:29

Some people apparently have an unshakeable respect for the sanctity of the boxing judge. Quite strange.

Whitaker made Chavez look stupid, ringsider. I know you don't like southpaws, but you'll have to give that one up.

ringsider · Post by **ringsider** » 29 Feb 2008, 20:03

I Feel Fine wrote:Some people apparently have an unshakeable respect for the sanctity of the boxing judge. Quite strange.

Whitaker made Chavez look stupid, ringsider. I know you don't like southpaws, but you'll have to give that one up.

Yeh....and Marvin Hagler beat Ray Leonard.

I Feel Fine · Post by **I Feel Fine** » 29 Feb 2008, 20:23

One has nothing to do with the other. Other than the fact that they were both southpaws, and you really seem to dislike southpaws. :)

ringsider · Post by **ringsider** » 29 Feb 2008, 20:28

I Feel Fine wrote:One has nothing to do with the other. Other than the fact that they were both southpaws, and you really seem to dislike southpaws. :)

Yes they do.....the judges who sat ringside and evaluated the fight and thus submitted their score cards as to who won or lost the match, declared the Chavez/Whitaker fight a draw........get it?

Nobody won.....

Goodnight, Irene · Post by **Goodnight, Irene** » 01 Mar 2008, 01:08

It was a draw, Holmes & Liston couldn't jab, Hagler & Whitaker weren't competent fighters, & this clown has the temerity to roll his eyes at others. I think all that eyerolling has shaken your equilibrium, Ringsider.

It would go some way to justifying your takes.

ringsider · Post by **ringsider** » 01 Mar 2008, 01:36

Minotauro · Post by **Minotauro** » 01 Mar 2008, 09:25

Chavez is a legend a top 20 p4p his performance against Rosario was amazing one of the best in recent history.

I Feel Fine · Post by **I Feel Fine** » 02 Mar 2008, 00:07

I wonder about Chavez as top 20. I would probably put him top 30, but that's just my opinion.

The Rosario fight is one of the best I've ever seen. A lot of fighters make their names on one or two, three or four exciting fights... Chavez had too many to count.

elmersalsa · Post by **elmersalsa** » 02 Mar 2008, 06:28

I have Chavez at #22 all time pound per pound, he could be a top 20, no doubt. And #2 at jr welterweight. I got him in the top 10 of the 130lb division...At lightweight, to me, he does not make the top 20. He did not stayed too much in that weight class, although he gave Edwin Rosario a beating of his life.

elmersalsa · Post by **elmersalsa** » 02 Mar 2008, 06:32

dempseyfire wrote:A legitimate great fighter, but sorry, one of the most over-rated fighters of the past 30 years. He had that nice looking record, and aggressive, 'macho' style and attitude which made him a big favorite of many, and he had very good skills and as noted was a killer body puncher. Look . . .who did he actually beat? Taylor is by far his best win and its ending is highly controversial (he was also losing by a wide margin at the time of the stoppage)

You have a past-it Camacho, and very good but not great veterans Ramirez and Rosario. I don't rate glass-jawed Mayweather very highly. Beyond that, a lot of ok fighters with inflated records like Alberto Cortes and Johnny Duplessis. Whitaker, by any objective observer, took him to school. Randall kicked his butt twice. Sure, he was slightly past his best at that point but not close to being shot.

It's not his fault 135-140 wasn't exactly loaded with great talent in the late 80s, but from what I saw I think he'd lose to many of the great boxers at 135. Prime Chavez-Prime Oscar is a toss-up IMO. Many Oscar haters will scream foul but an unbiased observer can't realistically state that's an easy fight for Julio.

I don't think that he was losing way far against Meldrick Taylor. It was more closer than what the people think. I do agree that he lost both fights to Frankie Randall, though.

elmersalsa · Post by **elmersalsa** » 02 Mar 2008, 06:32

dempseyfire wrote:A legitimate great fighter, but sorry, one of the most over-rated fighters of the past 30 years. He had that nice looking record, and aggressive, 'macho' style and attitude which made him a big favorite of many, and he had very good skills and as noted was a killer body puncher. Look . . .who did he actually beat? Taylor is by far his best win and its ending is highly controversial (he was also losing by a wide margin at the time of the stoppage)

You have a past-it Camacho, and very good but not great veterans Ramirez and Rosario. I don't rate glass-jawed Mayweather very highly. Beyond that, a lot of ok fighters with inflated records like Alberto Cortes and Johnny Duplessis. Whitaker, by any objective observer, took him to school. Randall kicked his butt twice. Sure, he was slightly past his best at that point but not close to being shot.

It's not his fault 135-140 wasn't exactly loaded with great talent in the late 80s, but from what I saw I think he'd lose to many of the great boxers at 135. Prime Chavez-Prime Oscar is a toss-up IMO. Many Oscar haters will scream foul but an unbiased observer can't realistically state that's an easy fight for Julio.

I don't think that he was losing way far against Meldrick Taylor. It was more closer than what the people think. I do agree that he lost both fights to Frankie Randall, though.

banjo · Post by **banjo** » 02 Mar 2008, 10:34

one of my favourite fighters but there are question marks over how great he truly was,
he put on awesome displays against martinez, mayweather, rosario and haugen however he looked awful against sweet pea and taylor in the first fight.
regarding chavez v taylor 1 this is why they shouldn't have done away with 15 rounds as there wouldn't have been any controversy because chavez would have finished taylor off.

in my view he was one of the top 10 130lbs, top 20 135lbs and top 3 140lbs

I Feel Fine · Post by **I Feel Fine** » 02 Mar 2008, 23:44

banjo wrote: regarding chavez v taylor 1 this is why they shouldn't have done away with 15 rounds as there wouldn't have been any controversy because chavez would have finished taylor off.

Yeah, I agree. I made that point recently in another thread. A lot of controversial fights in the last 20 years have been because of the loss of those last three rounds in championship fights.

Chava · Post by **Chava** » 07 Mar 2008, 00:32

Simply put, the finest fighter Mexico ever produced, which is saying something.

I was a fan of his for quite a while after I first saw him dismantle Roger Mayweather the first time, and followed his career closely. Then Tyson went to prison, and Don King needed a new flagship. The rot set in there in terms of my attitude toward him.

From that point on, he played the part of the spoiled rich man's son in his humbling at the hands of Whitaker and later Randall. He couldn't have shown less class if he tried, though he benefitted twice from his relationship with King (in his fight with Whitaker and the rematch against Randall, when he ingloriously quit and had the fight go to the scorecards, which were suspicious to say the least).

I lost a lot of respect for him over that latter part of his career, and fervently rooted against him after that. All that said, you can't deny the man his place in history. He was undeniably great.

theone · Post by **theone** » 07 Mar 2008, 07:58

Chavez is hands down my favorite fighter of all time. I also lost respect for him for the way he comported himself late in his career. I've since gotten over that and celebrate him for the truly outstanding fighter he was and for the many thrills he has provided me over the years.

elmersalsa · Post by **elmersalsa** » 07 Mar 2008, 14:08

Welcome back the one

Chavez, like Duran, Ali, Leonard, Toney, and Bobby Chacon, was one of my favorite fighters. But I had to turn my head in disgrace when he got schooled by Pernell Whitaker. At the time, I could not accept the defeat, and agreed with the judges that it was a "draw". But the reality was that it was a CLEAR WIN for Pernell. It was one of the greatest masterpiece performance of the last 30 years, maybe the greatest performance that I have ever seen.

walshb · Post by **walshb** » 10 Mar 2008, 16:42

Goodnight, Irene wrote:Okay, some random observations...

A) Doesn't deserve any indignation for the first fight with Taylor. Worked his ass off all night, & I don't for one minute think the stoppage was some grand robbery, Chavez earned it.

B) Plain got his ass kicked by Whitaker, & the covershot of The Ring with a posing Sweet Pea & the caption, "Hey Julio, Who's Number One Now?" will forever be a favourite of mine

C) The big question - Would he have beaten De La Hoya in his prime? Yes

D) The little question - Would he have beaten Tszyu? At 140lbs? Blindfolded & drunk out of his brain

E) Screw him for being at Vargas' side trying to snatch a sliver of reflected glory in the lead-up to the De La Hoya-Vargas fight, but being nowhere to be seen immediately afterward.

F) Sorry Pryor fans, at 140lbs. this guy would've eaten your boy up, no if's, &'s or but's

G) The roughest, toughest, meanest SOB ever to step into a ring in my lifetime. Bar f---in' none.

No way Julio beats Oscar ever. Oscar too fast and too hard and as tough.
Oscar had a chin and could box with the best and slug with the best. I'm a big JC fan, but Oscar is a bad match for himj. Speed and toughness combined will beat Julio....and Julio doesn't possess the punch to end this one at any time from 1-12

Goodnight, Irene · Post by **Goodnight, Irene** » 10 Mar 2008, 16:58

& it's ironic, because De La Hoya has long since been my favourite amongst the current crop of fighters, though I do not see him lasting forever against Chavez. I was thinking of a fifteen-rounder, btw. De La Hoya doesn't beat anyone over fifteen rounds, he's just never had the lungs for it. Over twelve, I would still favour Chavez on his best night, though De La Hoya has a pretty good shot to pull it out, as he is the swifter, more versatile fighter.

walshb · Post by **walshb** » 10 Mar 2008, 18:42

Well, the fact is that Oscar competed in an era where 12 was the rule and 15 was not. We cannot say for certain, that if 15 was the rule, Oscar couldn't compete. He'd train for 15, like the Jones' and Toney's and Mayweathers would. The fight over 12 is Oscar's all the way. Julio hasn't the power or speed to beat a peak Oscar. He will not break him and will dish a lot of leather throughout. Maybe it's Julio who doesn't see the end
here. Remember, JC was thoroughly beaten in their two fights, and I know JC was past it, but Oscar really whupped him. I know at peak, Julio will or should perform better, but would there really be a complete turn around???

Goodnight, Irene · Post by **Goodnight, Irene** » 10 Mar 2008, 18:58

De La Hoya would never have been able to last fifteen solid rounds, in my view. With Mayweather Sr. in his corner, he developed from a ten-round fighter to a twelve-rounder (barely), but had he been in the era of fifteen rounders, his career would look substantially less glossy (& as a fan, I thank God he wasn't in that era).

In any case, I think saying a twelve-rounder is De La Hoya's all the way is just too optimistic. I don't think anyone would doubt the early rounds would be De La Hoya's --- Chavez hasn't the speed to compete when both men are fresh. What he will do, however, is make De La Hoya work for three minutes of every round. He'll keep De La Hoya on his toes, & we saw how tired he became doing that against Trinidad (robbery, I tells ya!). Trinidad couldn't put one-tenth the amount of psychological pressure on De La Hoya that a young Chavez would. I think this would look quite a bit like Chavez-Taylor I, with either a narrow decision thanks to some big late rounds pulling it out for Chavez, or possibly even a late stoppage (I'd expect a tough fighter like De La Hoya to last the distance, but it's not impossible to see Chavez getting to him, though to De La Hoya's credit, he's only ever been KO'd by the much larger Hopkins).

No way in hell De La Hoya stops Chavez, though, Walsh. He couldn't stop Quartey, Mosley, Trinidad, & none of those men are even close to being as durable as a prime Chavez.

I would have to favour Chavez 60-40 over twelve rounds, & much more definitively over fifteen.

I Feel Fine · Post by **I Feel Fine** » 10 Mar 2008, 22:03

I would favor Chavez, though if Oscar did beat a prime Chavez I suppose it wouldn't be too surprising. But the claim that Oscar is as tough as Chavez isn't true, as is the claim that Oscar could box with the best. Osar had very good boxing skills, but he is not up there with the best in terms of boxing skills.