BoxRec

dempseyfire wrote:That's literally a comment reeking of ignorance of the era Gavilan fought in. Benitez at 147 in the early 1950s would've been considered a solid fringe contender. Hearns would've gotten his china chin checked often. Duran was an all-time great lightweight and a great welter but not the cream of the crop he was below 147 and above.

keithmoonhangover wrote:

elmersalsa wrote:

keithmoonhangover wrote:
But you won't answer my question?

Yes or no. It depends. Some fighters stay and some don't and move up. Not every fighter metabolism is the same.

The great Roberto Duran left the lightweight class because:
1. He cleaned up the division
2. No noteworthy challengers were to fight.
3. The great Alexis Arguello didn't come up to challenge him.
4. He, his manager Carlos Eleta, and his promoter Don King saw big opportunities at welterweight for a big money fight with Champion Pipino Cuevas or a multi million dollar payday with the great Sugar Ray Leonard in the future.

Now, I ask you this: If Arguello would've come up, and Leonard would've been a lightweight, do you think Duran would've left the lightweight class, seeing he could make all this money?

I'm just discussing Duran's weight at the moment. He moved up, he was a welterweight, that's it, simple. You're biased beyond belief. Was Hearns not at his true weight at 154?

Have you tried Alp's quiz? Should be easy for you, because only an idiot could get that wrong.

elmersalsa wrote:

keithmoonhangover wrote:I'm just discussing Duran's weight at the moment. He moved up, he was a welterweight, that's it, simple. You're biased beyond belief. Was Hearns not at his true weight at 154?

Have you tried Alp's quiz? Should be easy for you, because only an idiot could get that wrong.

What's wrong with you, man? You want to start something now? Watch it boy! Let's not get ugly in here. Watch it, boy!

keithmoonhangover wrote:

elmersalsa wrote:

keithmoonhangover wrote:I'm just discussing Duran's weight at the moment. He moved up, he was a welterweight, that's it, simple. You're biased beyond belief. Was Hearns not at his true weight at 154?

Have you tried Alp's quiz? Should be easy for you, because only an idiot could get that wrong.

What's wrong with you, man? You want to start something now? Watch it boy! Let's not get ugly in here. Watch it, boy!

Watch it, Boy? WTF? You sound like you're in the school yard, fighting me for lunch money.

Two things.

1. What were Duran and Hearn's true weight?

2. Have you taken Alp's quiz? I have. It's easy, even for a "boy".

elmersalsa wrote:

keithmoonhangover wrote:

elmersalsa wrote: What's wrong with you, man? You want to start something now? Watch it boy! Let's not get ugly in here. Watch it, boy!

Watch it, Boy? WTF? You sound like you're in the school yard, fighting me for lunch money.

Two things.

1. What were Duran and Hearn's true weight?

2. Have you taken Alp's quiz? I have. It's easy, even for a "boy".

Keep your manners to yourself. Don't destroy a smooth thread. If you want to start something, let's go. Read the first post and obey the rules. Ok?
Let's talk about boxing. How do you want it? Decent or ugly?

keithmoonhangover wrote:

elmersalsa wrote:

keithmoonhangover wrote:
Watch it, Boy? WTF? You sound like you're in the school yard, fighting me for lunch money.

Two things.

1. What were Duran and Hearn's true weight?

2. Have you taken Alp's quiz? I have. It's easy, even for a "boy".

Keep your manners to yourself. Don't destroy a smooth thread. If you want to start something, let's go. Read the first post and obey the rules. Ok?
Let's talk about boxing. How do you want it? Decent or ugly?

What are you on about? You were the one who started with the non-boxing talk. You made the above underlined comment.

I'll ask again....

1. What were Duran and Hearn's true weight?

2. Have you taken Alp's quiz?

elmersalsa wrote:

keithmoonhangover wrote:

elmersalsa wrote: Keep your manners to yourself. Don't destroy a smooth thread. If you want to start something, let's go. Read the first post and obey the rules. Ok?
Let's talk about boxing. How do you want it? Decent or ugly?

What are you on about? You were the one who started with the non-boxing talk. You made the above underlined comment.

I'll ask again....

1. What were Duran and Hearn's true weight?

2. Have you taken Alp's quiz?

I said, do not destroy the thread. Follow the rules. It's nice and smooth before you got in the conversation. Make it decent

dempseyfire wrote:Floyd and Trinidad should not be nearly so high; this division is stacked and they beat no great welters (Floyd's best wins there are over two blown-up, past their prime lightweights in Mosley and Pacman). Tito got the horrible decision vs Oscar and who . .Carr? Vargas?

Burley hardly had any fights at welter, so not sure how he's ranked at there . . .

Walker is absent since I'm putting him at 160.

My list (subject to revision):

1) Ray Robinson

2) Kid Gavilan

3) Emile Griffith

4) Joe Walcott

5) Henry Armstrong

6) Jimmy McClarnin

7) Ray Leonard

8 ) Carmen Basilio

9) Luis Rodriguez

10) Jose Napoles

11) Jack Britton

12) Barney Ross

13) Virgil Akins (look at the complete record prior to the championship; I have no doubt he let Jordan beat him per orders from the Mob)

14) Young Corbett III

15) Jackie Fields

16) Roberto Duran

17) Curtis Cokes

18) Billy Graham

19) Tommy Hearns (I'm breaking my cardinal rule here and ranking more ability than resume)

20) Joe Dundee

21) Fritzie Zivic

22) Pernell Whitaker

23) Floyd Mayweather Jr

24) Ted 'Kid' Lewis

25) Lou Broulliard

dempseyfire wrote:Griffith's loss to Paret is widely viewed as a poor decision. And yes the Rodriguez fights were close but so what? Rodriguez was an all-time great fighter who could've also beaten Leonard.

While a welterweight (and all welters back then fought non-title fights slightly above the 147 lb limit; you have to count his fights before vacating the title in '65) he beat Rodriguez, Gaspar Ortega, Jorge Fernandez, Florentino Fernandez, Willie Toweel, Yama Bahama, Isaac Logart, Holly Mims, Ralph Dupas, and Jose Stable. If one is ignorant of those fighters/that era, that's not an excuse. They were excellent excellent fighters and I could see several beating Leonard and Hearns. A MONSTER era at 147.

elmersalsa wrote:All three, Griffith, Gavilan and Leonard were exceptional welterweight greats. I don't see them talent wise one way better than the other. To me, they were AT THE SAME LEVEL. A series of fights between the 3 would be very difficult to score each time they fight. No doubt.

campfire wrote:

elmersalsa wrote:All three, Griffith, Gavilan and Leonard were exceptional welterweight greats. I don't see them talent wise one way better than the other. To me, they were AT THE SAME LEVEL. A series of fights between the 3 would be very difficult to score each time they fight. No doubt.

I DO SEE A DIFFERENCE IN TALENT WISE AND THAT IS THAT SRL IS AND WILL ALLWAYS BE A BETTER FIGHTER THEN GAVILAN AND GRIFFITH

elmersalsa wrote:Sugar Ray Robinson record at welterweight is: 45-0. Beat Kid Gavilan twice (first fight considered controversial by the people who saw Gavilan
the fight live), Fritzie Zivic, Henry Armstrong and Sammy Angott. Also beat Marty Servo, Tommy Bell, Bernard Docusen and George Costner, among the best of that era.

Kid Gavilan was 62-20-4 at welterweight. Beat Ike Williams (two out of three), Beau Jack, Billy Graham (three out of four), Carmen Basilio and Johnny Bratton (twice, one draw). Also beat some terrific contenders like Gil Turner, Rocky Castellani, Bobby Dykes, Gaspar Ortega, Tony Janiro, Tommy Bell, Eugene Hairston (split), and Ralph Zannelli among others....Whew! Nine of his 20 losses were when he was not in his prime anymore.

Emile Griffith was 37-5 at welterweight. Beat Luis Manuel Rodriguez (3 out of 4), Denny Moyer, Ralph Dupas, Florentino Fernandez, Benny "Kid" Paret (2 out of 3), Gaspar Ortega (twice), Isaac Logart, and Jorge Jose Fernandez (3 times).

Sugar Ray Leonard was 25-1 at welterweight. He beat Roberto Duran (split), Wilfred Benitez, and Thomas Hearns.

I am going to check the great Henry Armstrong record at welterweight. At least, I know he beat 6 hall of famers at 147lbs

campfire wrote:

elmersalsa wrote:Sugar Ray Robinson record at welterweight is: 45-0. Beat Kid Gavilan twice (first fight considered controversial by the people who saw Gavilan
the fight live), Fritzie Zivic, Henry Armstrong and Sammy Angott. Also beat Marty Servo, Tommy Bell, Bernard Docusen and George Costner, among the best of that era.

Kid Gavilan was 62-20-4 at welterweight. Beat Ike Williams (two out of three), Beau Jack, Billy Graham (three out of four), Carmen Basilio and Johnny Bratton (twice, one draw). Also beat some terrific contenders like Gil Turner, Rocky Castellani, Bobby Dykes, Gaspar Ortega, Tony Janiro, Tommy Bell, Eugene Hairston (split), and Ralph Zannelli among others....Whew! Nine of his 20 losses were when he was not in his prime anymore.

Emile Griffith was 37-5 at welterweight. Beat Luis Manuel Rodriguez (3 out of 4), Denny Moyer, Ralph Dupas, Florentino Fernandezubn, Benny "Kid" Paret (2 out of 3), Gaspar Ortega (twice), Isaac Logart, and Jorge Jose Fernandez (3 times).

Sugar Ray Leonard was 25-1 at welterweight. He beat Roberto Duran (split), Wilfred Benitez, and Thomas Hearns.

I am going to check the great Henry Armstrong record at welterweight. At least, I know he beat 6 hall of famers at 147lbs

Mate I do not care who beat who at Welterweight what I'm saying is SRL was a better fighter then Gavilan or Griffith and at any weight you want.

campfire wrote:if there is ever a street named after you elmersalsa it would surely have to be a ONE-WAY STREET............:

elmersalsa wrote:Henry Armstrong was 47-5-1 at welterweight. He beat Barney Ross, Ceferino Garcia (first fight), Baby Arizmendi (Fifth fight), Lew Jenkins (fight #2), Fritzie Zivic (fight #3), Pedro Montanez, Davey Day, Ernie Roderick, Ralph Zannelli (three times), Leo Rodak, and Juan Zurita.

And my question is, by seeing the 6 HOFs Armstrong beat, how could Sugar Ray Leonard be #2? That's a travesty.

Ambling Alp II wrote:

elmersalsa wrote:Henry Armstrong was 47-5-1 at welterweight. He beat Barney Ross, Ceferino Garcia (first fight), Baby Arizmendi (Fifth fight), Lew Jenkins (fight #2), Fritzie Zivic (fight #3), Pedro Montanez, Davey Day, Ernie Roderick, Ralph Zannelli (three times), Leo Rodak, and Juan Zurita.

And my question is, by seeing the 6 HOFs Armstrong beat, how could Sugar Ray Leonard be #2? That's a travesty.

Yeah, how could Leonard be rated higher than someone who lost two of three to Fritzie Zivic?

Leonard did beat three guys named Hearns, Duran and Benitez. Easily trumps Armstrongs best wins at welterweight.

Oh and Leonard beat several solid contenders as well; Andy Price, Randy Shields, Armando Muniz, Pete Ranzany, Davey Green, and Bruce Finch.

Ambling Alp II wrote:No lets not accept that becasue it's way off.
How dare you criticize the great Bruce Finch. Fince like Ray Lampkin, was an NABF champion. Remember, being an NABF champion automatically makes a fighter really good.
Shields gave Cuevas hell for 15 rounds. And Cuevas is a legend in Mexico.

As hard as it is for you to fathom, simply counting the number of Hall of Famers that a guy beat can be deceiving.

Not all Hall of Famers are equal. For example, Lew Jenkins was nowhere the fighter that Thmoas Hearns was.
Ross was the only welterweight that Armstrong beat that was in the class of Duran, Hearns of Benitez.

And of course Armstrong lost twice to Zivic. Whcih I am sure you like to ingore. Too bad, it happened.

Ambling Alp II wrote:Funny how being a NABF champion is a big deal for Lampkin for (who beat a fighter with a losing record for that title) but it doesn't for Finch whom Leonard beat.
You need to prop up Lampkin so it makes like Duran beating him means a lot.
It's almost like you are biased.

As for Armstrong, you made no counter to my statement. You pretty much just repeated yourself.