GREATEST MEXICAN FIGHTER

bollox · Post by **bollox** » 18 Apr 2006, 06:11

p.s. Why was Sanchez being guided towards a challenge to Arguello rather than unifying with one of the best feathers ever in Pedroza?

silkov · Post by **silkov** » 18 Apr 2006, 06:38

Sanchez was having hell making 126... which is evident by the fact that he was thinking of going straight to 135 rather than 130... it was probably a political thing keeping Sanchez and Pedrosa from fighting each other also...

bollox · Post by **bollox** » 18 Apr 2006, 06:45

Friggin politics

How often today do you have 2 titleholders at the same weight that in retrospect are both considered greats of their division. And they never squared off

Those pissheaded alpha orgs can disappear up their own arses. Although on second thoughts they may be the only thing keeping boxing together (somewhat). They've become almost a necesary evil

theone · Post by **theone** » 18 Apr 2006, 11:42

If your judging by skills and ability rather than number of titles won then Sanchez gets my vote, he just didn't get the time to prove how good he was, I'm sure that he would have won one or two more world titles, he had the frame to move up to 135 without much trouble..

Or he could have moved up and not have been as dominant. We will never know. It seems to me that Sanchez tragic and untimely death is held against other fighters when judging who was better. I believe in death he has been, just a little, and i stress just a little, overated. If you look at Sanchez career up to his death was it really more impressive than say Chavez's reign as Jr.Lightwieght champ? Not really.
Sanchez had 10 defenses to Chavez 9. Common opponents include Juan Laporte and Rueben Castillo. Sanchez did better against Laporte winning a clear cut decision while Chavez struggled with him. Sanchez fought Laporte when he was inexperienced, Chavez fought him when he was a veteran. Chavez did better against Castillo knocking him out in 5, while Sanchez beat him over 15 rounds in which Castillo gave a good account of himself. Chavez fought Castillo when he may have been past his best, sanchez beat him in his prime. The wins against Nelson and Gomez for Sanchez are big accomplishments. However, Nelson was very green and gave Sanchez hell and Chavez move up to lightweight and destroying Rosario is just as impressive as Sanchez beating Gomez who was coming up.
Head to head, the two didnt have too many advantages over each other. And yes I saw them both fight in their primes. ,Sanchez. moved around the ring better and seemed technically a bit more sound, but Chavez was unparelled in cutting off the ring, with the possible exception of Jeff Fenech; Chavez was stronger, hit harder and possibly had the better chin. Stamina wise they were possibly even.
I think head to head Chavez would pound out a competitve UD decision. I dont think Sanchez had the blazing speed to keep away from Chavez or enough power to, in the immortal word of Roy Jones, "disencourage" Chavez from coming in and landing the type of body shots Sanchez felt before.

silkov · Post by **silkov** » 18 Apr 2006, 12:04

theone wrote:
If your judging by skills and ability rather than number of titles won then Sanchez gets my vote, he just didn't get the time to prove how good he was, I'm sure that he would have won one or two more world titles, he had the frame to move up to 135 without much trouble..
Or he could have moved up and not have been as dominant. We will never know. It seems to me that Sanchez tragic and untimely death is held against other fighters when judging who was better. I believe in death he has been, just a little, and i stress just a little, overated. If you look at Sanchez career up to his death was it really more impressive than say Chavez's reign as Jr.Lightwieght champ? Not really.
Sanchez had 10 defenses to Chavez 9. Common opponents include Juan Laporte and Rueben Castillo. Sanchez did better against Laporte winning a clear cut decision while Chavez struggled with him. Sanchez fought Laporte when he was inexperienced, Chavez fought him when he was a veteran. Chavez did better against Castillo knocking him out in 5, while Sanchez beat him over 15 rounds in which Castillo gave a good account of himself. Chavez fought Castillo when he may have been past his best, sanchez beat him in his prime. The wins against Nelson and Gomez for Sanchez are big accomplishments. However, Nelson was very green and gave Sanchez hell and Chavez move up to lightweight and destroying Rosario is just as impressive as Sanchez beating Gomez who was coming up.
Head to head, the two didnt have too many advantages over each other. And yes I saw them both fight in their primes. ,Sanchez. moved around the ring better and seemed technically a bit more sound, but Chavez was unparelled in cutting off the ring, with the possible exception of Jeff Fenech; Chavez was stronger, hit harder and possibly had the better chin. Stamina wise they were possibly even.
I think head to head Chavez would pound out a competitve UD decision. I dont think Sanchez had the blazing speed to keep away from Chavez or enough power to, in the immortal word of Roy Jones, "disencourage" Chavez from coming in and landing the type of body shots Sanchez felt before.

Sanchez was hardly slow, could hit and had an iron chin... and all that while being weight weakened through most of his title reign... I can only see him improing with 4 to 9 extra pounds on him...

theone · Post by **theone** » 18 Apr 2006, 15:06

here were GREAT fights to be made at 108 and 112. All those years, how much was Lopez making per fight? $40,000? $50,000? If he'd stepped up, he could've made a lot more money, and actually proved that he was an all-time great.

I agree Dec. Lopez is lucky he gets the credit he does now, fighting in a weight class for so long that no one gave a shit about.
However its hard to deny his greatest for his longevity alone. Plus the fact that a few guys he beat easily, went up in weight and had great success.

bollox · Post by **bollox** » 18 Apr 2006, 16:48

Decagon wrote:
bollox wrote:There was no reason for Lopez to move up. From my perspective there was nothing to prove by going up. Great fighter
There were GREAT fights to be made at 108 and 112. All those years, how much was Lopez making per fight? $40,000? $50,000? If he'd stepped up, he could've made a lot more money, and actually proved that he was an all-time great.

Making money may not be the #1 priority for all fighters. Lopez may have been happy with what he was earning

Moving up to a division means proving your greatness? I think not. Hagler's not a great?

Borinken25 · Post by **Borinken25** » 18 Apr 2006, 17:03

I think the best in terms of accomplishment is JC Chavez and the second should be Sanchez. Sanchez could have been the best but we will never know because that tragic accident. Without a doubt they both 1 and 2 no matter who you think is the best. Just my opinion.

Arbachakov · Post by **Arbachakov** » 18 Apr 2006, 17:05

Lopez' competition was among the worst in history for a long-running champion that was considered P4P.

Only Galaxy really compares in that respect.

theone · Post by **theone** » 18 Apr 2006, 17:56

Moving up to a division means proving your greatness? I think not. Hagler's not a great?

There is a big difference between Hagler staying at middleweight and Lopez staying at strawweight. Hagler lived in one of the "glamour" divisions, second possibly only to heavyweight. He didnt have to go to another division to face good fighters, they came to him.

bollox · Post by **bollox** » 18 Apr 2006, 22:52

theone wrote:
Moving up to a division means proving your greatness? I think not. Hagler's not a great?
There is a big difference between Hagler staying at middleweight and Lopez staying at strawweight. Hagler lived in one of the "glamour" divisions, second possibly only to heavyweight. He didnt have to go to another division to face good fighters, they came to him.

It wasn't Lopez' fault there were no name fighters at his weight so why did he have to move up and disadvantage himself?. Let's say he went up and lost to Cabrajal and Gonzales - what would it really mean? (not much - he would have lost to naturally bigger fighters)

Moving up is waaaay overrated today and is almost meaningless. One reason is that there's a good chance that the opponent came from a different weight class also

silkov · Post by **silkov** » 19 Apr 2006, 07:06

I don't think it should be held against Lopez for not moving up... fighters like Monzon, Hagler, Pep stayed at one weight but are still accepted as all time greats... as for the division Lopez fought in not mattering many boxing fans don't know what their missing by not watching fighters under 126... these little guys often have more fire and skills than 10 heavyweights put together and often throw more punches in one round than aheavyweight will throw in 10... they deserve respect...

silkov · Post by **silkov** » 19 Apr 2006, 07:12

bollox wrote:
theone wrote:
Moving up to a division means proving your greatness? I think not. Hagler's not a great?
There is a big difference between Hagler staying at middleweight and Lopez staying at strawweight. Hagler lived in one of the "glamour" divisions, second possibly only to heavyweight. He didnt have to go to another division to face good fighters, they came to him.
It wasn't Lopez' fault there were no name fighters at his weight so why did he have to move up and disadvantage himself?. Let's say he went up and lost to Cabrajal and Gonzales - what would it really mean? (not much - he would have lost to naturally bigger fighters)

Moving up is waaaay overrated today and is almost meaningless. One reason is that there's a good chance that the opponent came from a different weight class also

Also because of the farcical rule allowing fighters to weigh in so long before the fight (safety right!?) we now have natural middleweights fighting at Welter and welterweights fighting at Feather... its much easier for fighters to move up now because many of them are fighting several divisions below what they should be... add to that the fact that their are certain 'nutriants' that certain fighters take these days to allow themselves to bulk up and you have a situation where moving up in weight is far different today to how it was in Lopezs hey day and certainly 20 years ago... its all become a bit of a farce like everything else in the game...

bollox · Post by **bollox** » 19 Apr 2006, 07:32

Very well put. It's becoming a total mess

generic screen name · Post by **generic screen name** » 19 Apr 2006, 08:42

All those are good points but their are still fighters that still stay on one weight like Israel Vazquez, and Bernard Hopkins, people went up to fight Hopkins althought it took awhile. Moving up is not totally meaningless. Trinidad and De La Hoya were dominant as a welterweight then when they moved up it was a totally different story.

Also we didn't realize how good Sugar Ray Robinson was until he moved to middleweight, it was like he had to penalize himself to realize his dominance as a welterweight.

thunderfromdownunder · Post by **thunderfromdownunder** » 19 Apr 2006, 09:17

mexico is a very fortunate boxing counrty, if your mexican you know there will always be a good fighter to follow, same as the U.S i suppose. we Australians may have to wait a while for our nexy great champ :(

Expug · Post by **Expug** » 19 Apr 2006, 18:42

Cant forget about old timer Baby Arizmendi. Probably not the greatest ever, but some solid wins including a couple over Hammerin Henry.

Migz · Post by **Migz** » 20 Apr 2006, 01:58

Decagon wrote:
bollox wrote:Making money may not be the #1 priority for all fighters. Lopez may have been happy with what he was earning

Moving up to a division means proving your greatness? I think not. Hagler's not a great?
Hagler fought at 160, arguably the best division boxing's ever seen. 105 is EASILY the worst division in the history of boxing. Hagler proved he was great by beating great fighters. Lopez beat NO ONE. Trust me, if the best fights were at 163, Hagler would've moved there, because that's the type of fighter he was.

i agree with that completely how can you possibly say haglers not a great he was one of the best pure 160ers along with monzon the sport has everseen. And yes in my books MW has had the greatest fighters to ever enter the weight division so i see it as clearly the the top weight division of all. Just look at the list of names who won titles at 160 Duran, Monzon, Ray Robinson, Ray Leonard, Hagler, Greb, Fullmer , Lamotta and the list goes on. To be called one of the best pure of that weight is quite an achievement although i think Monzon was the best pure at 160.

barry · Post by **barry** » 20 Apr 2006, 04:17

>>>There was no reason for Lopez to move up. From my perspective there was nothing to prove by going up.<<<

He had nothing to prove...so moving up and facing Michael Carbajal, or Humberto Gonzalez would have proved nothing? I beg to differ! If Lopez had moved up and beat Carbajal and Gonzalez then he would certainly be right up there with Chavez, but by avoiding the bouts, which he did avoid, well...that is why he does not get undeniable credit.

He was a great fighter, but guys like Kwang-Soo Oh and Yamil Caraballo just don't do much for a fighters career other than add a couple of empty wins to his record and Lopez' record is full of empty wins!

Lopez faced a few good fighters, but I would have rather seen him face the likes of both Alex Sanchez and Ratanapol Sor Vorapin around 1994, or 1995 instead of waiting until they were both pretty much shot. Lopez had a very, very guarded career, which is not saying that he could not have beaten the very best because I think he could have, but it's unfortunate that he did not step up to find out and that is exactly why he does not get the kind of credit that a Chavez, Olivares or Barrera gets!

The fact that you think that Lopez is a great and Hagler is not...well...that says it all!

bollox · Post by **bollox** » 20 Apr 2006, 05:12

He had nothing to prove...so moving up and facing Michael Carbajal, or Humberto Gonzalez would have proved nothing? I beg to differ! If Lopez had moved up and beat Carbajal and Gonzalez then he would certainly be right up there with Chavez, but by avoiding the bouts, which he did avoid, well...that is why he does not get undeniable credit.

Firstly, I'm of the decided opinion that Lopez was a better fighter than both Cabrajal and Gonzales. I'd take Lopez tto beat both guys if they fought in the same natural weight class

Can you tell me why Lopez should have moved out of his optimum weight class? To prove something? Prove what? Nothing

He was a great fighter, but guys like Kwang-Soo Oh and Yamil Caraballo just don't do much for a fighters career other than add a couple of empty wins to his record and Lopez' record is full of empty wins!

Lopez faced a few good fighters, but I would have rather seen him face the likes of both Alex Sanchez and Ratanapol Sor Vorapin around 1994, or 1995 instead of waiting until they were both pretty much shot. Lopez had a very, very guarded career, which is not saying that he could not have beaten the very best because I think he could have, but it's unfortunate that he did not step up to find out and that is exactly why he does not get the kind of credit that a Chavez, Olivares or Barrera gets!

Chavez, Olivares, Barrera - If they'd fought at Lopez' weight they be viewed very differently today, guranteed

The fact that you think that Lopez is a great and Hagler is not...well...that says it all!

I never said Hagler wasn't a great so stop making out that's what I was trying to say. If you couldn't make out the ridiculously flawed logic I was applying to Hagler's case in relation to some fool claiming that moving up is how you prove yourself as a fighter, that's not my fault

barry · Post by **barry** » 20 Apr 2006, 06:17

>>>Can you tell me why Lopez should have moved out of his optimum weight class? To prove something? Prove what? Nothing<<<

Prove what? To prove that he could beat fighters other than the likes of Manny Melchor, or Kittichai Preecha...you know...fighters in the A group instead of those in the C group!

>>>Chavez, Olivares, Barrera - If they'd fought at Lopez' weight they be viewed very differently today, guranteed<<<

Jimmy Wilde fought at and below Ricardo Lopez' weight his entire career...funny...no one seems to view him an different...same goes for Jimmy Barry...you know why they are viewed in awe compared to Lopez...instead of fighting in the comfortable and very talent less lowest weight they moved up and fought bigger fighters...fighters that could give them a challenge instead of always facing opponents that they knew before going in that they were superior in every way against. The only fight that Lopez ever went into where there were serious questions was his bouts with Alvarez and in the first Lopez was very, very, very lucky to come out with a draw and in the second, well I think he won, but it was as close as a fight could be. Those were the only two fights ion his career that were a real challenge and he had the fight of his life in each. Personally, I would chose Lopez to beat both Carbajal and Gonzalez, but I could just as easily see Carbajal and Gonzalez knocking Lopez' out! The thing that separates the true greats from those that just miss being great is the will to fight the best!

I bet you are a real big Joe Calzaghe fan as well...am I right?

>>>I never said Hagler wasn't a great so stop making out that's what I was trying to say.<<<

Your exact words:

>>>Moving up to a division means proving your greatness? I think not. Hagler's not a great?<<<

Hagler's not a great? Now tell me what you meant because I don't think anyone here is a psychic, but then again, you don't have to be a psychic to know what you wrote...it's pretty straight forward. Maybe you should think about what you are saying before you make such ridiculous claims...then you won't have to try to squirm your way out of the actual silly claims you make!

And yes it is your fault…if that wasn’t what you were trying to say, then you should have said it correctly to begin with!

bollox · Post by **bollox** » 20 Apr 2006, 06:44

>>>Can you tell me why Lopez should have moved out of his optimum weight class? To prove something? Prove what? Nothing<<<

Prove what? To prove that he could beat fighters other than the likes of Manny Melchor, or Kittichai Preecha...you know...fighters in the A group instead of those in the C group!

Rubbish. "A group" = fighters in different weight classes? That's ridiculous. And how is that a level playing field in a sport where thealleged aim is to match 2 fighters of relatively equal ability and definitely of equal (natural) fighting weight? It isn't

Lopez dominated for a long time in his natural weight class (so did Hagler) yet he loses points for not moving up?. What idiot put another condition onto what constitutes greatness or proving yourself? Should Bob Foster lose points for getting KO'd in a number of his HW fights? Of course not - it's because he was fighting out of his weight class

>>>Chavez, Olivares, Barrera - If they'd fought at Lopez' weight they be viewed very differently today, guranteed<<<

Jimmy Wilde fought at and below Ricardo Lopez' weight his entire career...funny...no one seems to view him an different...same goes for Jimmy Barry...you know why they are viewed in awe compared to Lopez...instead of fighting in the comfortable and very talent less lowest weight they moved up and fought bigger fighters...fighters that could give them a challenge instead of always facing opponents that they knew before going in that they were superior in every way against. The only fight that Lopez ever went into where there were serious questions was his bouts with Alvarez and in the first Lopez was very, very, very lucky to come out with a draw and in the second, well I think he won, but it was as close as a fight could be. Those were the only two fights ion his career that were a real challenge and he had the fight of his life in each. Personally, I would chose Lopez to beat both Carbajal and Gonzalez, but I could just as easily see Carbajal and Gonzalez knocking Lopez' out! The thing that separates the true greats from those that just miss being great is the will to fight the best!

And??? How many champs were around in Wilde's day and in how many weight classes? In today's bubblegum boxing world there's way too much store placed in how many titles someone has won. It's one of the reasons boxing has steadily been turning to shit

I bet you are a real big Joe Calzaghe fan as well...am I right?

errrr...no

>>>I never said Hagler wasn't a great so stop making out that's what I was trying to say.<<<

Your exact words:

>>>Moving up to a division means proving your greatness? I think not. Hagler's not a great?<<<

Hagler's not a great? Now tell me what you meant because I don't think anyone here is a psychic, but then again, you don't have to be a psychic to know what you wrote...it's pretty straight forward. Maybe you should think about what you are saying before you make such ridiculous claims...then you won't have to try to squirm your way out of the actual silly claims you make!

And yes it is your fault…if that wasn’t what you were trying to say, then you should have said it correctly to begin with!

Correct, my exact words. Complete with a "?". I'd say the vast majority could work out that it was saying. Except you

theone · Post by **theone** » 20 Apr 2006, 06:52

Moving up to a division means proving your greatness? I think not. Hagler's not a great?

It doesnt read to me like bollox was saying Hagler wasnt great. In fact he was using Haglers greatness to back uip his point that Lopez didnt need to move up in weight to acheive greatness. While I think there is a difference between Hagler staying put and Lopez refusing to move up to meet better challenges, I get what Bollox is trying to say.

theone · Post by **theone** » 20 Apr 2006, 06:58

Should Bob Foster lose points for getting KO'd in a number of his HW fights? Of course not - it's because he was fighting out of his weight class

Unlike Foster however, all Lopez had to do was go up four pounds! Really I dont even know why there is a strawweight division. If a fighter cant fight at at least 109pds then he should go be a jockey.

silkov · Post by **silkov** » 20 Apr 2006, 07:08

As anyone who knows a bit about the human body will understand 4 pounds is a fair amount of weight for a little guy to put on... if Lopez was comfortable at his weight why should he have moved up?. As for his record being full of meaningless wins I think this attitude has a lot to do with the fact that most people just know very little about Lopez and other fighters of his weight and the fighters that he fought and so take for granted that they are not good fighters... just because you dont know anything about his opposition doesnt make them bad fighters. Having got a lot of fights of both Lopez and Carbajal I think Lopez was a cut above Micheal even though I'm a big fan of him... I think the fight wasn't made to protect Carbajal more than anything else... Lopez wasn't afraid of anyone....

GREATEST MEXICAN FIGHTER

re

Re: re