The Difference

[HomicideHenry]

Usually I always hear comments from people online or not, about "great fighters". Personally I have always thought there were two principles: A) Great Fighters, and B) Guys Who Fought Great. There is a difference in my mind between a great fighter and someone who fought great. I have seen men and women who had superior boxing skill and ability than some of the elite "all time greats", but they lacked something that kept them back from the top.

Here's an example, least for me: Arturro Gatti.

He had a great, excellent, three fight series with Mickey Ward, and was rarely in a dull fight. BUT, Arturro Gatti is and never will be (never was for that matter) a great fighter.

Another good example? Rocky Graziano. Outside of his three brawls with Tony Zale, he never quite showed even at his best that he was an all-time great fighter. He was rarely in a dull fight, yes, but he wasn't a great fighter.

See what I am meaning now? If so, put down your own examples of the men and women, you think are a perfect example of fighters who fought great but who themselves were not great fighters.

[jimglen]

GREG HAUGAN, great little fighter, in lots of great fights, but not an all-timer.
Though for my money his ilk need be remembered more because they make up the sport at top level and others less deserving, like Ward are better remembered... agree about Grazianno.

[HomicideHenry]

Greg Haugen was one of my favorites too, was no match for Chavez though. If I recall he started out as a Toughman competitor, blue collar all the way.

[Goodnight, Irene]

If the testing board is not just being a great fighter, but rather, being an all-time great fighter, I'll submit Jerry Quarry & Felix Trinidad.

[Jaywheel]

Jake LaMotta
Ricardo Mayorga
Jorge Paez
Tommy Morrison
Andrew Golota

[theone]

Jake LaMotta
Ricardo Mayorga
Jorge Paez
Tommy Morrison
Andrew Golota

LaMotta would be highly insulted to see his name listed with those other guys. And he would be totally justified in feeling that way.

[Jaywheel]

Where did I mention I was comparing one to the others?
I tried to think of fighters who were very entertaining, and if I recall he's not known as Sugar Jake LaMotta.

If the question was: Which boxer had the nicest moustache? and I was to answer Marvin Hagler, Evander Holyfield and Scott Ledoux, you think that the first two should also be highly insulted?

I will add Jose Luis Castillo to that list.

[Seamus]

Golota is the exact opposite of the criteria. He was a guy who had the tools to be an all time great, but always found a way to disappoint.

[Jaywheel]

. I have seen men and women who had superior boxing skill and ability than some of the elite "all time greats", but they lacked something that kept them back from the top.

Golota is the exact opposite of the criteria. He was a guy who had the tools to be an all time great, but always found a way to disappoint.

You're saying he is the opposite and then your depiction of him is the criteria itself.
Golota lacked heart and the ability to face adversity/pressure.

[giacomino]

Marvin Johnson. Saw him about 10 times and he was never in a bad fight. Had a pretty good record, won a piece of the light heavy title three times in some stellar action battles but only successfully defended it once.
Might put one of the guys who beat Johnson, Matthew Saad Muhammad in the same category, although for 2 1/2 years, he as near HOF material at lt. heavy king

[ringsider]

Greg Haugen was one of my favorites too, was no match for Chavez though. If I recall he started out as a Toughman competitor, blue collar all the way.

And he was robbed in his fights with that stupid Pazienia.

[Cap]

Toronto's Eddie Melo, who fought mostly in Montreal, was not a great fighter, but he was in a bunch of exciting fights back in the day. Too bad he turned out the way he did. I always liked his buddy Nick Furlano too. Good little lightweight/junior welterweight.

[elmersalsa]

What about middleweight contender William "The Caveman" Lee? He was always in a good scrap.

[elmersalsa]

Jake LaMotta
Ricardo Mayorga
Jorge Paez
Tommy Morrison
Andrew Golota

LaMotta would be highly insulted to see his name listed with those other guys. And he would be totally justified in feeling that way.

I second that, the one

[theone]

Where did I mention I was comparing one to the others?
I tried to think of fighters who were very entertaining, and if I recall he's not known as Sugar Jake LaMotta.

If the question was: Which boxer had the nicest moustache? and I was to answer Marvin Hagler, Evander Holyfield and Scott Ledoux, you think that the first two should also be highly insulted?

I will add Jose Luis Castillo to that list.

Compiling fighters on a list based on the criteria given for this post does suggest that the ring achievements of the fighters are comparable. And going by that criteria and your list, then LaMotta should absolutely be insulted if he read it.
Lamotta may not have reached the legendary status of Ali, Armstrong or Robinson, but you don't have to reach that level to be a true great of the ring. LaMotta was that and a worthy HOFamer. In fact, you can make a respectable argument that LaMotta was one of the 10 greatest Middle weights that ever lived. That puts him more than head and shoulders above everyone else on your list.

[Jaywheel]

Compiling fighters on a list based on the criteria given for this post does suggest that the ring achievements of the fighters are comparable.

Again, why is that? I never mentionned that they were on a comparable level. It's not a ranking. They gave great fights and weren't the total package. LaMotta couldn't do much against technicians(Reeves, Zivic, Robinson) but to wear them down. He accomplished more than the others, but like I said, he was no Sugar.

Next time I'll make 5 separate posts to make sure no one makes a fuss about nothing.