JohnH Stracey, how good??
-
thepocketrocket
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 3283
- Joined: 16 Jan 2003, 06:26
JohnH Stracey, how good??
As an extension to the Randy Turpin thread, how good was Napoles! Obviously most have us have seen the Napoles fight and losing to Palomino wasnt a terrible result..
But how good was he, did he just fight Napoles at the right time or is Stracey underated by Boxing fans today??
But how good was he, did he just fight Napoles at the right time or is Stracey underated by Boxing fans today??
-
hitman_hatton1
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 6150
- Joined: 26 Nov 2003, 20:57
-
overhand_right
- Heavyweight

-
hitman_hatton1
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 6150
- Joined: 26 Nov 2003, 20:57
Fair enough, each to his own. I however thing he was a good Champion (but not a great one).overhand_right wrote:Not really. Palomino? Seen tapes of the guy (Stracey/Green/Duran), left me as underwhelmed as Jim Watt tapes.
And would have been in the mix with Welterweight Champions of recent vintage.
-
Arbachakov
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 380
- Joined: 15 Apr 2006, 12:35
overhand_right wrote:Not really. Palomino? Seen tapes of the guy (Stracey/Green/Duran), left me as underwhelmed as Jim Watt tapes.
Definitely not an old timer we say "oh Judah/Cotto/Mayweather/some other current fighter would never have lived in Palominos day!!"
Well, Judah is garbage so there's a good chance we could say that about him even for Palomino(who was good not great).
One thing I can say is that John H Stracy is a great guy - or certainly he was the last time I met him.
He was a guest speak at a fight of mine a few years back. He passed my cornerman an autograph for me to bring back to the dressing room.
A true gent.
As for his abilities - I have not seen that much of him to be honest; so couldn't comment with much authority - but as a former Welterweight champion of the world he was certianly good enough!!
He was a guest speak at a fight of mine a few years back. He passed my cornerman an autograph for me to bring back to the dressing room.
A true gent.
As for his abilities - I have not seen that much of him to be honest; so couldn't comment with much authority - but as a former Welterweight champion of the world he was certianly good enough!!
met him many times and concur - top bloke. palomino was better than most on this thread claim. just beneath the very best in what turned into a tough division around that time. lets get it right, stracey went to the back yard of a renowned great, napoles, and got decked in the first. it showed tremendous composure and belief to transform this into an early destruction of his opponent, which is what he did. i think it was a great win. i like john too much to really get into the nitty gritty of his status. world champion, what can i say?
-
jamesmcdonnell
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 45232
- Joined: 12 Nov 2003, 06:11
Really? Name one good welterweight champion that Judah's beaten? The mediocre and feather fisted spinks? Carlos Baldomir....oh wait, hang on, he lost to Baldomir didn't he?overhand_right wrote:Not really. Palomino? Seen tapes of the guy (Stracey/Green/Duran), left me as underwhelmed as Jim Watt tapes.
Definitely not an old timer we say "oh Judah/Cotto/Mayweather/some other current fighter would never have lived in Palominos day!!"
-
jamesmcdonnell
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 45232
- Joined: 12 Nov 2003, 06:11
Not to mention the proliferation of belts and soft defences.
I mean, imagine if Calzaghe had had to defend his title against someone like Hagler!
I think the fighters of that era had it a lot tougher, it was harder to get a title shot, and harder to hang on to that title once you got it. The alphabet situation now makes it easier to remain a champion with careful matchmaking, and soft or non-existent mandatories.
I'm not saying that Calzaghe is inferior to minter or sibson, but, he has had it far easier with the WBO title than belt holders back then did.
I mean, imagine if Calzaghe had had to defend his title against someone like Hagler!
I think the fighters of that era had it a lot tougher, it was harder to get a title shot, and harder to hang on to that title once you got it. The alphabet situation now makes it easier to remain a champion with careful matchmaking, and soft or non-existent mandatories.
I'm not saying that Calzaghe is inferior to minter or sibson, but, he has had it far easier with the WBO title than belt holders back then did.
-
hitman_hatton1
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 6150
- Joined: 26 Nov 2003, 20:57
the world title tag has been cheapened so much even in the last 4 or 5 yrs.jamesmcdonnell wrote:Not to mention the proliferation of belts and soft defences.
I mean, imagine if Calzaghe had had to defend his title against someone like Hagler!
I think the fighters of that era had it a lot tougher, it was harder to get a title shot, and harder to hang on to that title once you got it. The alphabet situation now makes it easier to remain a champion with careful matchmaking, and soft or non-existent mandatories.
I'm not saying that Calzaghe is inferior to minter or sibson, but, he has had it far easier with the WBO title than belt holders back then did.
it's a terrible mess.
-
Arbachakov
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 380
- Joined: 15 Apr 2006, 12:35
Very true.jamesmcdonnell wrote:Not to mention the proliferation of belts and soft defences.
I mean, imagine if Calzaghe had had to defend his title against someone like Hagler!
I think the fighters of that era had it a lot tougher, it was harder to get a title shot, and harder to hang on to that title once you got it. The alphabet situation now makes it easier to remain a champion with careful matchmaking, and soft or non-existent mandatories.
I'm not saying that Calzaghe is inferior to minter or sibson, but, he has had it far easier with the WBO title than belt holders back then did.
Minter alone fought better competition in about three years than Calzaghe has managed in his whole title reign.