Page 2 of 2

Re: Lets talk Lightweights

Posted: 07 Sep 2006, 17:52
by elmersalsa
Ambling Alp wrote:
elmersalsa wrote:
Ambling Alp wrote:Here are my Top 50 Lightweights of All-Time.
Please let me know who you think is way too high and who is way too low.
If someone isn't on the list at all and you think they should be, list someone else that shouldn't have made it.

1. Roberto Duran
2. Benny Leonard
3. Joe Gans
4. Henry Armstrong
5. Barney Ross
6. Pernell Whitaker
7. Freddie Welsh
8. Packy McFarland
9. Lou Ambers
10. Ike Williams
11. Carlos Ortiz
12. Joe Brown
13. Sammy Angott
14. Sammy Mandell
15. Tony Canzoneri
16. Beau Jack
17. Bob Montgomery
18. Alexis Arguello
19. Ad Wolgast
20. Oscar De La Hoya
21. Julio Cesar Chavez
22. Battling Nelson
23. Frank Erne
24. Kid Lavigne
25. Billy Petrolle
26. Dave Holly
27. Jack Blackburn
28. Hector Camacho
29. Shane Moseley
30. Al Singer
31. Esteban DeJesus
32. Ken Buchanan
33. Ismael Laguna
34. Jimmy Carter
35. Lew Jenkins
36. Willie Ritchie
37. Nicolino Locche
38. Floyd Mayweather
39. Duilio Loi
40. Juan Jurita
41. Rocky Kansas
42. Guts Ishimatsu
43. Jose Luis Ramirez
44. Edwin Rosario
45. Ray Mancini
46. Vinny Pazienza
47. Greg Haugen
48. Jose Luis Castillio
49. Carlos Teo Cruz
50. Jim Watt
Henry Armstrong is too high.

Ike Williams and Joe Brown are definately top 5 lightweights.

Ken Buchanan, Ismael Laguna, Shane Mosley, Billy Petrolle and Esteban DeJesus should be in the top 20.

Carlos Ortiz should be in the top 7.
Elmer, If Buchanan,Laguna,Moseley,Petrolle,and DeJesus should be in the top 20, what 5 guys should be taken out?

If Williams and Brown are top 5, what 2 should get taken out of the top 5?
Hello alp:

You want me to say 5 that do not belong there at the top 20 lightweights, but ONLY I can find 3 or maybe 4 guys that should not be with the 20 best of that weight class.

The 3 or 4 guys that should be taken out of the top 20:

Alexis Arguello: He did not had too many fights at 135. Hey, he even had no more than 10 fights at lightweight. How can he be a top 20 lightweight???

Oscar DeLahoya: It is the same thing with Arguello. He was not an all time great in no weight class. He was a title holder in 4 different weight classes, and in none of those weight classes he participated he dominated. Maybe at 135 was his best days, but he did not fought enough at 135.

Packey McFarland: What did he do at 135??? Maybe I am IGNORANT about this guy, or I do not know much about fighters before the 20th century. His championship record at 135 is not impressive, neither the quality of opposition.

Sammy Mandell: He got CREDENTIALS to be at the top 20. Fought a lot of fights at 135, and of the 4 he is the most deserving to be there.

The 2 of them that should be taken out of the top 5:

1. Henry Armstrong: A top 10 lightweight no question about that, but not a top 5 135 pounder. His championship record in that weight class is POOR and ONLY beat 1 hall of famer in that weight class who is Lou Ambers. He beat Chalky Wright at 135, but Chalky was not a NATURAL lightweight.

2. Barney Ross: was a good lightweight, but not as good when he was at 140 or 147. His championship record is also TOO POOR to begin with.

Ike Williams was the BEST LIGHTWEIGHT of the 1940s. Probably the best lightweight era of all time. He beat Beau Jack, Willie Joyce, Sammy Angott and Bob Montgomery and being a natural lightweight at the time he beat Kid Gavilan. Plus his unbeaten streak at lightweight was AWESOME!!! He should be at #4 or 5 in my view.

Joe Brown was the best lightweight of the 1950s. Made 11 title defenses in 6 long years as champion, ducking nobody in his time. He even went to London, England and came alive as the victor against tough foe Dave Charnley. It took another great lightweight to take his title: Carlos Ortiz. By the time he lost to Ortiz, he was already 36 years old. He should be in the top 5 too.

Posted: 07 Sep 2006, 18:47
by BrocktonBlockbuster49
im lazy but ill get u the newspaper articles on blackburn

Posted: 08 Sep 2006, 13:43
by Ambling Alp
Elmer, the reason that I asked for 5 guys that I should take out of my top 20 was that you listed 5 guys that I didn't have that should be :) (Buchanan,Laguna,Mosesely,Petrolle, and DeJesus).

I had Arguello because he did have some nice wins at this weight. He beat Ramirez,Boza Edwards, Watt, Noel, and Mancini at this weight.

De La Hoya beat Molina, and crushed Ruelas,Hernandez, and Leija. His power at this weight class was awesome. This may have been his best weight class.

McFarland's biggest win was over Freddie Welsh. (He also had a couple of draws with Welsh, whom most people would agree is a top 10 lightweight) He also beat some other good fighters of his era, such as Jimmy Britt and Owen Moran (Newspaper decision).

There are some borderline calls, but I thought Arguello and De La Hoya did enough at this weight class to be consider top 20, and McFarland without question.

Sammy Mandell beat Rocky Kansas, Jimmy McClarnin and Canzoneri at this weight, so I thought he was definitely top 20.

One factor which made Armstrong so high was his win over Barney Ross. Even though it was for the welterweight title, Armstrong was within the lighweight limit. For a fighter weighing only 133.5 to beat Barney ross (who weighed 142 for the fight), that is quite an achievement.
as you mentioned Armstrong beat Ambers, and he also beat Jenkins and Baby Arizmendi.

As for Barney Ross, he did lose to Armstrong, but he have some nice wins at lightweight. He beat Petrolle twice and Canzoneri twice at this weight.

As for the guys that you suggested, I thought that they didn't quite do enough to be rated in the top 20.

Moseley beat Leija and Molina, but that's about it at this weight class.
Beside the two close wins over Laguna, Buchanans record isn't really that impressive.

DeJesus had the big win over duran, but except for the win over Ishmatsu, there really isn't anything that impressive.

Laguna did win one out of 3 against Ortiz, but lost twice to Buchanan.

Petrolle did win one out 2 against Cnazoneri, and beat Jackie Kid Berg, but otherwise there wasn't much.

Obviously Moseley, DeJesus,Petrolle,Buchanan and Laguna were very good fighters,but when you compare them the guys ahead of them, they seem to come up short.

Once again, I also want to say that often their is very little difference between one rated 5 or even 10 spots ahead of another guy.

Posted: 08 Sep 2006, 19:19
by elmersalsa
Ambling Alp wrote:Elmer, the reason that I asked for 5 guys that I should take out of my top 20 was that you listed 5 guys that I didn't have that should be :) (Buchanan,Laguna,Mosesely,Petrolle, and DeJesus).

I had Arguello because he did have some nice wins at this weight. He beat Ramirez,Boza Edwards, Watt, Noel, and Mancini at this weight.

De La Hoya beat Molina, and crushed Ruelas,Hernandez, and Leija. His power at this weight class was awesome. This may have been his best weight class.

McFarland's biggest win was over Freddie Welsh. (He also had a couple of draws with Welsh, whom most people would agree is a top 10 lightweight) He also beat some other good fighters of his era, such as Jimmy Britt and Owen Moran (Newspaper decision).

There are some borderline calls, but I thought Arguello and De La Hoya did enough at this weight class to be consider top 20, and McFarland without question.

Sammy Mandell beat Rocky Kansas, Jimmy McClarnin and Canzoneri at this weight, so I thought he was definitely top 20.

One factor which made Armstrong so high was his win over Barney Ross. Even though it was for the welterweight title, Armstrong was within the lighweight limit. For a fighter weighing only 133.5 to beat Barney ross (who weighed 142 for the fight), that is quite an achievement.
as you mentioned Armstrong beat Ambers, and he also beat Jenkins and Baby Arizmendi.

As for Barney Ross, he did lose to Armstrong, but he have some nice wins at lightweight. He beat Petrolle twice and Canzoneri twice at this weight.

As for the guys that you suggested, I thought that they didn't quite do enough to be rated in the top 20.

Moseley beat Leija and Molina, but that's about it at this weight class.
Beside the two close wins over Laguna, Buchanans record isn't really that impressive.

DeJesus had the big win over duran, but except for the win over Ishmatsu, there really isn't anything that impressive.

Laguna did win one out of 3 against Ortiz, but lost twice to Buchanan.

Petrolle did win one out 2 against Cnazoneri, and beat Jackie Kid Berg, but otherwise there wasn't much.

Obviously Moseley, DeJesus,Petrolle,Buchanan and Laguna were very good fighters,but when you compare them the guys ahead of them, they seem to come up short.

Once again, I also want to say that often their is very little difference between one rated 5 or even 10 spots ahead of another guy.
I will answer you next week with the records in my hand, Alp. I like talking boxing with you.

I will be more clearer in why Laguna, Buchanan, DeJesus and Mosely are definately top 20 lightweights.

Posted: 08 Sep 2006, 21:00
by silkov
elmersalsa wrote:
Ambling Alp wrote:Elmer, the reason that I asked for 5 guys that I should take out of my top 20 was that you listed 5 guys that I didn't have that should be :) (Buchanan,Laguna,Mosesely,Petrolle, and DeJesus).

I had Arguello because he did have some nice wins at this weight. He beat Ramirez,Boza Edwards, Watt, Noel, and Mancini at this weight.

De La Hoya beat Molina, and crushed Ruelas,Hernandez, and Leija. His power at this weight class was awesome. This may have been his best weight class.

McFarland's biggest win was over Freddie Welsh. (He also had a couple of draws with Welsh, whom most people would agree is a top 10 lightweight) He also beat some other good fighters of his era, such as Jimmy Britt and Owen Moran (Newspaper decision).

There are some borderline calls, but I thought Arguello and De La Hoya did enough at this weight class to be consider top 20, and McFarland without question.

Sammy Mandell beat Rocky Kansas, Jimmy McClarnin and Canzoneri at this weight, so I thought he was definitely top 20.

One factor which made Armstrong so high was his win over Barney Ross. Even though it was for the welterweight title, Armstrong was within the lighweight limit. For a fighter weighing only 133.5 to beat Barney ross (who weighed 142 for the fight), that is quite an achievement.
as you mentioned Armstrong beat Ambers, and he also beat Jenkins and Baby Arizmendi.

As for Barney Ross, he did lose to Armstrong, but he have some nice wins at lightweight. He beat Petrolle twice and Canzoneri twice at this weight.

As for the guys that you suggested, I thought that they didn't quite do enough to be rated in the top 20.

Moseley beat Leija and Molina, but that's about it at this weight class.
Beside the two close wins over Laguna, Buchanans record isn't really that impressive.

DeJesus had the big win over duran, but except for the win over Ishmatsu, there really isn't anything that impressive.

Laguna did win one out of 3 against Ortiz, but lost twice to Buchanan.

Petrolle did win one out 2 against Cnazoneri, and beat Jackie Kid Berg, but otherwise there wasn't much.

Obviously Moseley, DeJesus,Petrolle,Buchanan and Laguna were very good fighters,but when you compare them the guys ahead of them, they seem to come up short.

Once again, I also want to say that often their is very little difference between one rated 5 or even 10 spots ahead of another guy.
I will answer you next week with the records in my hand, Alp. I like talking boxing with you.

I will be more clearer in why Laguna, Buchanan, DeJesus and Mosely are definately top 20 lightweights.
Yeah, I'd put Buchanan and Luguna in the top 20 too...

Posted: 09 Sep 2006, 09:22
by Ambling Alp
Silkov- What two guys would take out of the top 20 if you put Buchanan and Laguna in?
Remember there is only room for 20. :)

Posted: 09 Sep 2006, 09:25
by Ambling Alp
Elmer -i like talking boxing with you as well. We don't always agree but at least you have some reasoning in your opinions. I look forward to what you have to say about the lightweights.

Posted: 11 Sep 2006, 19:48
by elmersalsa
Ambling Alp wrote:Elmer, the reason that I asked for 5 guys that I should take out of my top 20 was that you listed 5 guys that I didn't have that should be :) (Buchanan,Laguna,Mosesely,Petrolle, and DeJesus).

I had Arguello because he did have some nice wins at this weight. He beat Ramirez,Boza Edwards, Watt, Noel, and Mancini at this weight.

De La Hoya beat Molina, and crushed Ruelas,Hernandez, and Leija. His power at this weight class was awesome. This may have been his best weight class.

McFarland's biggest win was over Freddie Welsh. (He also had a couple of draws with Welsh, whom most people would agree is a top 10 lightweight) He also beat some other good fighters of his era, such as Jimmy Britt and Owen Moran (Newspaper decision).

There are some borderline calls, but I thought Arguello and De La Hoya did enough at this weight class to be consider top 20, and McFarland without question.

Sammy Mandell beat Rocky Kansas, Jimmy McClarnin and Canzoneri at this weight, so I thought he was definitely top 20.

One factor which made Armstrong so high was his win over Barney Ross. Even though it was for the welterweight title, Armstrong was within the lighweight limit. For a fighter weighing only 133.5 to beat Barney ross (who weighed 142 for the fight), that is quite an achievement.
as you mentioned Armstrong beat Ambers, and he also beat Jenkins and Baby Arizmendi.

As for Barney Ross, he did lose to Armstrong, but he have some nice wins at lightweight. He beat Petrolle twice and Canzoneri twice at this weight.

As for the guys that you suggested, I thought that they didn't quite do enough to be rated in the top 20.

Moseley beat Leija and Molina, but that's about it at this weight class.
Beside the two close wins over Laguna, Buchanans record isn't really that impressive.

DeJesus had the big win over duran, but except for the win over Ishmatsu, there really isn't anything that impressive.

Laguna did win one out of 3 against Ortiz, but lost twice to Buchanan.

Petrolle did win one out 2 against Cnazoneri, and beat Jackie Kid Berg, but otherwise there wasn't much.

Obviously Moseley, DeJesus,Petrolle,Buchanan and Laguna were very good fighters,but when you compare them the guys ahead of them, they seem to come up short.

Once again, I also want to say that often their is very little difference between one rated 5 or even 10 spots ahead of another guy.

Hello alp once again.

I will tell you FIRST why Alexis Arguello and Oscar Delahoya does not belong with the 20 top lightweights.

Why Alexis Arguello does not belong with the top 20 lightweights: First of all, although he had a good record at this weight class, Arguello ONLY had 9 fights at this weight class. He beat 4 world champions at this weight class and maybe 1 HOF. He had, like you said impressive wins but also had a doubtful decision win in the eyes of many. Many people believe that he lost to Jose Luis Ramirez and the judges gave it to him. And to topple it off, he lost by a HUGE UPSET against Vilomar Fernandez which was the second biggest upset of that year behind Ali-Spinks I of 1978. He won 5 title fights. He was more of a featherweight or jr lightweight. By the time he stepped up to lightweight he was not the same guy, but still had that punching power. He really was not a lightweight. His record at lightweight is 8-1, with 6KOs.

Why Oscar DeLaHoya does not belong with the top 20 lightweights: Although he had more fights than Arguello at this weight class, STILL he did not had enough fights at 135. He ONLY had 12 fights, winning all of them, scoring 10KOs. He beat 5 world champions and 2 HOFs: John-John Molina (questionable decision by many), Jorge Paez (already washed up), Jesse James Leija (a jr. lightweight at best), Genaro Hernandez (a jr. lightweight at best) and his greatest win of all at this weight class vs Rafael Ruelas (KO2), which was nothing out of this world. Ruelas was more less MEDIOCRE at best even with a good record of 43-1. At 135, he won the Ring Fighter of the Year Award for 1995, which is a great accomplishment. He deserves to be a greater lightweight than Arguello. But from there nothing else.

Henry Armstrong to many, (and I would not argue with any person that thinks this way) is the greatest pound per pound fighter of all time. His record speaks for itself. But to put him at #4 in front of the monsters of this weight class like Ike Williams, Joe Brown, Carlos Ortiz and even the masterful Pernell Whitaker is OVERRATED. Why??? Armstrong's title fight record is POOR TO BEGIN WITH. Even though he has a good record at this weight class (34-4, 31KOs), he does not has as many fights and not many wins like the likes of Williams, Ortiz or Brown. But he has good wins against 6 HOFs and 6 world champs. I gotta give you that, But I cannot give you the Barney Ross victory because that was a welterweight fight no matter how you look at it. Plus it was a welterweight title fight for Ross' title. I say he belongs in the top 10 lightweights, but not at the top 5 best of that division.

Which bring Packey McFarland. All he has a win over the great Freddie Welsh and that is it for him. All other fights are no contests. He had a good record though, but not a great title fight record.

Sammy Mandell: I agree with you that he belongs in the top 20 lightweights. It is very hard to rate these fighters at their own weight class. I could consider him a top 20 lightweight because like I have said before, he has CREDENTIALS. He was champion for 4 years and make 6 title defenses and had 65 fights at 135, including beating 5 world champions and 2 HOFs in 6 years: Rocky Kansas (W10), Jimmy McLarnin (W15...it was a title fight), Jackie Fields (W10) and the great Tony Canzoneri (W10). I do not have him in my own personal list as a top 20 lightweight, but he is worthy to be a top 20 lightweight.

Ike Williams was the BEST LIGHTWEIGHT in probably the greatest era of the division. He beat 5 HOFs, in which 4 of them were lightweights: Willie Joyce (he probably could be a HOF), Beau Jack, Sammy Angott, Tippy Larkin and Bob Montgomery. He also beat 5 world champions at 135. He reigned for 6 years, making 8 successful title defenses. He won 91 fights at this weight class in 11 years. He had 33 fights in a row without a loss at one time, in this weight class. He also beat Juan Zurita, Eddie Giosa, Johnny Bratton, and Enrique Bolanos. Being a lightweight, he went up in weight and beat the great Kid Gavilan. He was the Ring Fighter of the Year in 1948, being a lightweight.

Joe Brown without a doubt is another monster in this division that deserves to be in the top 5. He made 11 title defenses in 6 years, beating top noch opposition. The great Carlos Ortiz had to dethrone him, being Brown at age of 36. He was the best lightweight of the 50s. He was a globetrotting champ that fought all over the world in 16 countries and was the Ring Fighter of the Year in 1961 being also a lightweight. He beat 4 world champions and 2 HOFs. He fought the best lightweights there is and beat a lot of them: Bud Smith, Orlando Zulueta, Kenny Lane, Isaac Logart, Jimmy Carter and Dave Charnley to name a few. He was a true embassador of the sport.

Carlos Ortiz: I do no know why you have him under Armstrong and never less at position #12 when he is also a top 10 lightweight, maybe a top 5. He was the best lightweight of the 60s and has 7 wins vs 5 HOFs in title fights. He also has beaten 5 world champions and made 13 title fights at 135, making 10 title defenses in 2 reigns beaing the likes of Joe Brown, Kenny Lane, Ismael Laguna, Flash Elorde and Sugar Ramos. He got 51 fights at 135, winning 45 and losing 5 with 20KOs and 1NC. He has also 11 title wins at 135. He was only stopped once and that happened with the Great Ken Buchanan being Ortiz 36 years old and washed up.


Now, you say that Ken Buchanan, Billy Petrolle, Ismael Laguna, Shane Mosley and Billy Petrolle are not top 20 lightweights. I think they are.

Ken Buchanan was ONLY stopped once in 69 bouts. He made 63 fights at 135. He won 59 and lost 4 fights @ 135. He fought at that weight for 15 years. That was most of his career. He had an excellent record of 43-1 w/ 15KOs before losing to the greatest lightweight ever, which was the only time he was stopped. We all know that it was not a real KO, but that was the only time he was stopped, regardless. You take Duran out of his era and he probably could have been the greatest lightweight ever. He won his first 33 contests, all of them at lightweight. He was the lightweoght king defeating another HOF in Ismael Laguna for the title in which both fights could have gone either way. Duran NEVER GAVE HIM A REMATCH. After the Duran fiasco, he won 13 fights in a row. Not to mention that he beat 6 world champions and 2 HOFs. He beat also tough Carlos "Morocho" Hernandez, Jim Watt, Frankie Narvaez, Al Ford, Ruben Navarro and Antonio Puddu. He was also British and European Lightweight Champion. Do not ask me how did he lost to Ishimatsu Suzuki. I cannot answer taht. But his resume is very good to be at the lightweight top 20 all time.

Billy Petrolle: Another deserving fighter that is a top 20 lightweight in my view. He had 92 fights @ 135 and won 47 of them, losing 15, drawing 8 and 21NC w/ 36KOs. He only fought once for the lightweight tiltle losing to the great Tony Canzoneri by decision. But at this wight class, Petrolle beat 3 world champions and 3 HOFs. That is more HOFs in this class that Arguello nor Delahoya ever beat together. He fought at 135 for 7 years. He beat Ray Miller, Jack "Kid" Berg, Tony Canzoneri in the first fight in a non title affair and Battling Battalino. That is better quality of opposition that Arguello or DeLaHoya has done at this weight class.


Shane Mosley: He is a top 20 lightweight. He made 8 successful title defenses of the IBF liightweight crown--All of them by knockout!!!---
The problem he is not a top 10 lightweight great is because of his quality of oppostion at 135 is POOR. He beat 3 world champions and 1 HOF at this weight, but they were either washed up or not in his class. He won his first 30 bouts, all lightweight affairs. I do no t consider him greater than Armstrong at this weight, but he was better than Arguello and DLH @ 135 in terms of accomplishments and longevity in the weight class. In his lightweight days, between April 1994 to April 1997, he scored 13 wins in a row by the way of knockout.

Esteban DeJesus: In historical significance, he was the FIRST and PROBABLY the ONLY MAN that ever beat the great Roberto Duran in his prime. Not to mention that he fought a great rivalry with Duran in 3 bouts in 3 great fights. He was the first man to dropped Duran on the canvas, and did it twice. He beat 3 world champions at 135. He was also Puerto Rican and NABF Lightweight Champion and WBC Lightweight king. He made 36 fights at 135, wiining 34 with 14KOs. He was so good that at this weight HE ONLY LOST 2 BOUTS. WHO WAS THE ONLY ONE TO BEAT HIM AT THIS WEIGHT CLASS??? We all know that. It had to be the greatest of this weight class to do it. He won 4 title fights @ 135. And the ONLY 2 title losses at this weight were against you know who. He also in this weight beat Ishimatsu Suzuki, Ray Lampkin, Johnny Gant, Percy Hayles and Edwin Viruet.

Ismae Laguna: You may say that he does not belong at the top 20 lightweights of all time. But let us look at his record and his accomplisments. He was a 2-time world lightweight champion in an era that was one of the toughest in boxing. For cripes sake, he had to beat the great Carlos Ortiz for the crown. He fought Ortiz 3 times. And his quality of opposition is WAY BETTER THAN Arguello's and Delahoya's combined at this weight class. He also had more fights than Arguello and Delahoya at this weight class put together. He fought 39 times at lightweight in 7 years and won 31 fights, losing 7, drawing once with Niccolino Locche (Probably a robbery), and 14KOs. He was NEVER STOPPED in his career of 75 fights. Was NEVER STOPPED at 135. He beat 5 world champions and 2 HOFs, all of them at lilghtweight. He fought 4 HOFs and 8 titlists at 135. Among the other guys he beat besides Ortiz: Mando Ramos, Ishimatsu Suzuki, Chango Carmona, Percy Hayles, Frankie Narvaez, Carlos "Morocho" Hernandez, and Alfredo Urbina.
His title fight resume is POOR, but he is a two time world lightweight champion

Posted: 12 Sep 2006, 22:40
by Ambling Alp
Well Elmer, you gave me a lot to chew on. A lot of what you say seems accurrate. I will tell the biggest points that I disagree with:

Buchanan- He did have some decent wins (beside Laguna) but I guess I'm not really overly impressed with the guys that you mentioned that he beat. The loss to Ishimatsu hurts hios cause a little. As for the Duran fight, I thought that Duran was beating him pretty easily until it ended. I don't think he had any chance of beating Duran in a rematch.

DeJesus -Some of the guys that you mentioned that he beat weren't that good. Hayles was really just a tomato can. Gant was a fringe contender at best, Viruet (who DeJesus won a split decison over) was ok, but nothing special. Lampkin was a little better but certainly nothing special.

Laguna - Ramos,Suzuki, Carmona, Navarez were nice wins, but Hernandez and Urbina were fringe contenders at best. As you mentioned, Laguna also lost several fights at this weight.

Moseley - As you mentioned his competiton wasn't that good at lightweight. He seemed impressive, but it's hard to say since his competition was relatively weak at this weight class. His best wins were probably over Molina and Leija; that just not enough to make the top 20.

Petrolle -This is best case that you make. There are several guys that I had ahead of him that Petrolle could get rated a head. there are so many guys that are close. I have no problem with someone rating him in the top 20.

As for the guys that I have in the top 20 that you don't:
Arguello- I know he did have a loss at this weight, and that he barely beat Ramirez. (Otherwise I would have hadhim higher than #18.)However as mentioned previously, he had some good wins at this weight. He was a helluva fighter, an all time great. There is no way that Ken Buchanan for example, was better than him, even at this weight.

De La Hoya - I don't think at all that the Molina fight was that close at all. De La Hoya definitely deserved the decison. He blew everyone else away at this weight. His opponents were certainly better than Moseley at this weight. Moseley best wins were over Molina and Leija and De La Hoya breat them. De La hoya also beat Hernandez, and even though as you mention he was more of a Jr Lightweight, he was a pretty darn good one and De La Hoya stopped him. Ruelas would be remebered as a better lightweight if De La Hoya wouldn't have destroyed him in 2 rounds.
De La Hoya has to be rated higher than Moseley at lightweight.

Mc Farland- you mention that his title record wasn't that good, well that is because he couldn't get title shots. there weren't multiple titles like there are nowadays. Still he beat the best of his time. Besides Welsh, Murphy, Britt, were good and he also had draws with Jack Britton.

In summary, you can and did make some good points defending your guys. You just have to balance their pulsses and minuses. It's also hard judging the guys that didn't stick at the weight for long. I only rated them highly if they scored some big wins in the fights that they did fight at this weight. Petrolle is the one guy that I could see breaking the top 20, and I could move DeJesus up some from #32.

Posted: 15 Sep 2006, 15:47
by elmersalsa
Ambling Alp wrote:Well Elmer, you gave me a lot to chew on. A lot of what you say seems accurrate. I will tell the biggest points that I disagree with:

Buchanan- He did have some decent wins (beside Laguna) but I guess I'm not really overly impressed with the guys that you mentioned that he beat. The loss to Ishimatsu hurts hios cause a little. As for the Duran fight, I thought that Duran was beating him pretty easily until it ended. I don't think he had any chance of beating Duran in a rematch.

DeJesus -Some of the guys that you mentioned that he beat weren't that good. Hayles was really just a tomato can. Gant was a fringe contender at best, Viruet (who DeJesus won a split decison over) was ok, but nothing special. Lampkin was a little better but certainly nothing special.

Laguna - Ramos,Suzuki, Carmona, Navarez were nice wins, but Hernandez and Urbina were fringe contenders at best. As you mentioned, Laguna also lost several fights at this weight.

Moseley - As you mentioned his competiton wasn't that good at lightweight. He seemed impressive, but it's hard to say since his competition was relatively weak at this weight class. His best wins were probably over Molina and Leija; that just not enough to make the top 20.

Petrolle -This is best case that you make. There are several guys that I had ahead of him that Petrolle could get rated a head. there are so many guys that are close. I have no problem with someone rating him in the top 20.

As for the guys that I have in the top 20 that you don't:
Arguello- I know he did have a loss at this weight, and that he barely beat Ramirez. (Otherwise I would have hadhim higher than #18.)However as mentioned previously, he had some good wins at this weight. He was a helluva fighter, an all time great. There is no way that Ken Buchanan for example, was better than him, even at this weight.

De La Hoya - I don't think at all that the Molina fight was that close at all. De La Hoya definitely deserved the decison. He blew everyone else away at this weight. His opponents were certainly better than Moseley at this weight. Moseley best wins were over Molina and Leija and De La Hoya breat them. De La hoya also beat Hernandez, and even though as you mention he was more of a Jr Lightweight, he was a pretty darn good one and De La Hoya stopped him. Ruelas would be remebered as a better lightweight if De La Hoya wouldn't have destroyed him in 2 rounds.
De La Hoya has to be rated higher than Moseley at lightweight.

Mc Farland- you mention that his title record wasn't that good, well that is because he couldn't get title shots. there weren't multiple titles like there are nowadays. Still he beat the best of his time. Besides Welsh, Murphy, Britt, were good and he also had draws with Jack Britton.

In summary, you can and did make some good points defending your guys. You just have to balance their pulsses and minuses. It's also hard judging the guys that didn't stick at the weight for long. I only rated them highly if they scored some big wins in the fights that they did fight at this weight. Petrolle is the one guy that I could see breaking the top 20, and I could move DeJesus up some from #32.
Well alp, I was no t trying to convince you nor anybody in this particular subject. But I feel that this guys (Moseley, DeJesus, Laguna, and Buchanan) were exceptional fighters in this weight class and their records speak for themselves. They beat the top notch contenders of their day and if they would have fight now, this contenders would have been world champions. Buchanan, Laguna and DeJesus would definately be triple crown titlists in this era or time.

You mentioned that Urbina and Morocho Hernandez (Laguna's victims) were not good fighters but Hernandez became jr welter world champ and Urbina was Mexican Lightweight Champion in the 60s and you want to know which was his biggest win? he beat Jose "Mantequilla" Napoles by decision in 10 rounds. Napoles was ducked by many fighters back in the 60s and is one of the top 50 greatest fighters of all time by anyone standards. After beating Napoles, THE NEXT FIGHT, Urbina beat the great Joe Brown. That means 2 wins back to back against HALL OF FAMERS.

DeJesus like I said before, beat the top contenders of the lightweight class. The ONLY one to beat him was the great Duran. He beat Lampkin TWICE once for the NABF lightweight title. Did not Lampkin gave Duran FITS in Panama City? He went 14 grueling rounds with the greatest lightweight in history. Duran perhaps is the division greatest puncher. DeJesus beat Suzuki, the one that beat Buchanan and gave Laguna a tough fight in Panama City. Viruet may not be special, but he did not fall at the hands of the Hands of Stone, and that happened twice. Gant was not special, but was a top notch contender and DeJesus had to go through him for a title ranking. Gant went the disatance with Angel Espada at welter for the title. He lost, but went the distance against a welter.

Delahoya's record at lightweight, his best wins were against jr lightweights. The Molina fight was a GIFT by many. And Ruelas does not have a CLEAR VICTORY against a top notch opponent at 135. But well, they are your justifications. If you believe that Arguello and Delahoya were better fighters @ lightweight than DeJesus, Mosley, Buchanan or Laguna be it. I certainly do not think that Arguello or DLH should be in the ligthweight class top 20 because their stay at lightweight was BRIEF. If so, I could name a few other guys at 135 that would back off Arguello and DLH at this weight class: Paddy DeMarco, Julio Cesar Chavez, Edwin "Chapo" Rosario, Jimmy Carter, Frank Erne, Willie Ritchie and Jack McAuliffe were better at this weight class than Arguello and DLH. They had better credentials and more greater victories than those 2, and I do not consider them top 20 either.

Arguello was a helluva fighter, but not a helluva lightweight. That is like saying that Duran was not a helluva welter, which he was not. Arguello's best days and defining fights were at feather and jr lightweight. He beat Jim Watt for the crown. Then, who beat Jim Watt before Arguello did?...answer is Ken Buchanan, but you are not saying that Buchanan at lightweight was not impressive??? He was a master boxer, that could have been the next Benny Leonard IF Duran was not around. You are saying that Duran would have beat him in a return match, well, that is the other 50 cent question. We NEVER know how the rematch would have been and I am a Duran fan. I think I am GLAD in a way he did not gave him a rematch. In another way, I am DISSAPOINTED that he did not gave him another shot like a 2 or 3 fight series he had with DeJesus.

How can you not be impressed with the guys Buchanan beat or fought? He fought top notch opposition almost his whole career. He beat Laguna twice, for crying out loud. He beat Puddu for the European title and he was also British lightweight champ. Don't you think that those are not great accomplishments? Plus he won 63 fights at this weight class does not justify his greatness? What Buchanan have to do? Let's give him his props, alp. He was exceptional, no doubt about it.

Like I said before, now I have mentioned 12 guys that at 135, were BETTER than Arguello and DLH.

Posted: 16 Sep 2006, 02:21
by Jaclem
..fine tuning these things is impossible.....kind of like those afi best musical-comedy-noir-romantic films list they put on just to get people talking.

my only comment....jimmy carter without handcuffs i'd rate a little higher......but that was always hard to predict before a fight...and so obvious during and after it....

re

Posted: 16 Sep 2006, 02:30
by barry
I think Brockton got the Holly-Blackburn newspaper results from me...which I got them from Philadelphia newspapers of the day!

Posted: 18 Sep 2006, 13:56
by Ambling Alp
Elmer, Ithouight I would respond to your last post.

Laguna -I just don't think the win over Urbina was that big of deal at all.True, Urbina had beat Napoles, but a more experienced Napoles knokced out Urbina in the first round in their second fight and the third round in their 3rd fight. Urbin'a win over Brown was when Brown was 37 and past it. Urbina hadn't been a ranked contender in 3 years when Laguna beat him.
DeJesus - I am coming around on him and think I may have underrated him a bit (I had him at #31) However, I still don't know if he deserves to be in the top 20. You keep mentioning the win over Gant and say that Gant was a top notch contender. Gant was never a top notch contneder. Going the distance against Espada really isn't that impressive. Gant lost his fights against his decent opponents.

Buchanan - You ask what mopre could he have done? Well,He could have beaten Ishmastu and Velazquez but he lost to them. He could beat DeJesus, but he never foguht him. He could have beat Laguna more decisively,both were very close. He could have given Duran a more competitive fight. I don't agree with your theory that buchanan had a good chance to win a rematch against Duran. Duran won their fight very convincingly. Most of the rounds Duran won very easily.

De La hoya - First of all, I completely disagree wih the idea that his win over Molina was a "Gift". I remember that fight and didn't have any doubt that he won. I didn't know that anyone thought this was a bad decision. De La Hoya scored a knockdown and almost kncoked Molina out. Since that was a 10-8 round, Molina would have had to have won 7 rounds to win the fight. (Assuming no rounds were scored even) Giving Molina 5 rounds is pushing it.
I thought De La Hoya beat some good (althought certainly not great) lightweights. Ruelas beat some lightweight contenders and De La hoya destroyed him. You mentioned some other guys that you would rate a head of De La Hoya. Well, I only had him one spot ahead of Chavez and not much higher than Erne. You certainly could argue that each could be a head of De La Hoya. Carter had too many losses to not so great fighters. Rosario had some big wins and also some bad losses. I didn't think Ritchie did quite enough. I didn't know where to rate McAuliffe since he hadn't fought anyone else that I had in the top 50 or close to it.

I understand why you wouldn't rate De La Hoya and Arguello high because they didn't have a lot of fights at this weight. I just feel that they beat enough good lightweights to show that they were great at this weight.

Posted: 18 Sep 2006, 16:03
by elmersalsa
Hello Alp

Buchanan did pretty good at lightweight. His 63 wins at this weight class is his testament. He was British, European and World Champion. Well, that it is not enough for you? fine. I have him over DeLaHoya and Arguello.
You may say that Duran would have beat him easily, well, why did not Duran gave him a rematch?

Laguna's quality of opposition CLEARLY was far better than Arguello's and DLH combined. Urbina beat a guy that NOBODY back in the day want it to fight. Brown was 37, I agree, but not too far of his past title reign. Name me a TRUE LIGHTWEIGHT that DeLaHoya has beaten? Name me one, please?

Jimmy Carter might have losses to lesser opponents, but he beat great and TRUE lightweights. He beat Ike Williams, Paddy DeMarco, Bud Smith and Del Flanagan. Those are great victories. Most of his losses were at the end of his career. But hey, it was the 1950s, one of the toghest eras in boxing. I do not see in DLH resume at lightweight of victories of that caliber. Most of his greatest wins, like I have said, were against jr lightweights. Rafael Ruelas was MEDIOCRE. I cannot see him go not even 1 round with Duran or DeJesus. At least Lampkin went amost the distance with Duran and went to the end with Esteban.

You may say that DLH fight with Molina was not a gift. Ask at least 1 million Puerto Ricans what they think of that fight?

Posted: 19 Sep 2006, 13:31
by Ambling Alp
Elmer,
I didn't mean to imply that Buchanan wasn't a good fighter. You asked what more he could have done and I just pointed out some things.

Jimmy Carter did have some good wins, however, he lost a lot of times to lesser fighters. That has to be counted against him. I'm not even going to count some of his losses against guys when he was young, old, or were slightly above the lightweight limit. He lost the title to Salas, that is just embarrassing. He did beat Wallace Bud Smith, but he also lost to him twice. That is embarrassing as well. Smith wasn't that good at all;in fact he lost 11 straight fights after he beat Carter twice. Salas and Smith are two of the lightweight worst champions ever and the only reason they were champions is because Carter lost to them.
Carter also lost to guys like Sonny Boy West, Percy Bassett and Bobby McQuilla. these are guys that all-time great fighter should beat.

If it was only one or 2 bad losses that would be one thing;but Carter had way too many losses to be considered in the top 20.

You asked me to name one true lightweight that De La Hoya beat? Well he beat ruelas who was the lightweight champion when De La hoya crushed him.
Why you keep calling Ruelas mediocre and bringing up guys like Wallace Bud Smith, Gant and Hayles as big wins for guys that you support is puzzling to me.
You really think that ruelas wouldn't last 1 round with DeJesus? DeJesus scored a grand total of 3 first round knockouts in his entire 62 fight career. All 3 were against tomoto cans. Ruelas was nver kncoked out in the first round in his career. Ruelas wasn't all time great or anything,but he was certainly not a mediocre fighter.

De La hoya also beat Leija, who fought a lot of good fighters at Jr Lightweight, Lightweight and Jr Welter.He was never destroyed against anyone else like he was against De La Hoya.

Of course De La Hoya also beat Molina.

I have two questions for you:
1. Do you personally think that the buchanan-Duran fight was competitive?

2. Do you personally think that Molina should have got the decison against De La Hoya?

Posted: 19 Sep 2006, 14:01
by Arbachakov
Ambling Alp wrote:Elmer,
I didn't mean to imply that Buchanan wasn't a good fighter. You asked what more he could have done and I just pointed out some things.

Jimmy Carter did have some good wins, however, he lost a lot of times to lesser fighters. That has to be counted against him. I'm not even going to count some of his losses against guys when he was young, old, or were slightly above the lightweight limit. He lost the title to Salas, that is just embarrassing. He did beat Wallace Bud Smith, but he also lost to him twice. That is embarrassing as well. Smith wasn't that good at all;in fact he lost 11 straight fights after he beat Carter twice. Salas and Smith are two of the lightweight worst champions ever and the only reason they were champions is because Carter lost to them.
Carter also lost to guys like Sonny Boy West, Percy Bassett and Bobby McQuilla. these are guys that all-time great fighter should beat.

If it was only one or 2 bad losses that would be one thing;but Carter had way too many losses to be considered in the top 20.

You asked me to name one true lightweight that De La Hoya beat? Well he beat ruelas who was the lightweight champion when De La hoya crushed him.
Why you keep calling Ruelas mediocre and bringing up guys like Wallace Bud Smith, Gant and Hayles as big wins for guys that you support is puzzling to me.
You really think that ruelas wouldn't last 1 round with DeJesus? DeJesus scored a grand total of 3 first round knockouts in his entire 62 fight career. All 3 were against tomoto cans. Ruelas was nver kncoked out in the first round in his career. Ruelas wasn't all time great or anything,but he was certainly not a mediocre fighter.

De La hoya also beat Leija, who fought a lot of good fighters at Jr Lightweight, Lightweight and Jr Welter.He was never destroyed against anyone else like he was against De La Hoya.

Of course De La Hoya also beat Molina.

I have two questions for you:
1. Do you personally think that the buchanan-Duran fight was competitive?

2. Do you personally think that Molina should have got the decison against De La Hoya?
I'd certainly say Duran vs Buchanan was a competitive fight, just not a close one.Compare it to Duran vs Moore for the difference between a real one-sided beating and a fight where one guy is losing almost every round but the rounds themselves are mostly competitive and hard-fought.

Posted: 21 Sep 2006, 18:36
by elmersalsa
Ambling Alp wrote:Elmer,
I didn't mean to imply that Buchanan wasn't a good fighter. You asked what more he could have done and I just pointed out some things.

Jimmy Carter did have some good wins, however, he lost a lot of times to lesser fighters. That has to be counted against him. I'm not even going to count some of his losses against guys when he was young, old, or were slightly above the lightweight limit. He lost the title to Salas, that is just embarrassing. He did beat Wallace Bud Smith, but he also lost to him twice. That is embarrassing as well. Smith wasn't that good at all;in fact he lost 11 straight fights after he beat Carter twice. Salas and Smith are two of the lightweight worst champions ever and the only reason they were champions is because Carter lost to them.
Carter also lost to guys like Sonny Boy West, Percy Bassett and Bobby McQuilla. these are guys that all-time great fighter should beat.

If it was only one or 2 bad losses that would be one thing;but Carter had way too many losses to be considered in the top 20.

You asked me to name one true lightweight that De La Hoya beat? Well he beat ruelas who was the lightweight champion when De La hoya crushed him.
Why you keep calling Ruelas mediocre and bringing up guys like Wallace Bud Smith, Gant and Hayles as big wins for guys that you support is puzzling to me.
You really think that ruelas wouldn't last 1 round with DeJesus? DeJesus scored a grand total of 3 first round knockouts in his entire 62 fight career. All 3 were against tomoto cans. Ruelas was nver kncoked out in the first round in his career. Ruelas wasn't all time great or anything,but he was certainly not a mediocre fighter.

De La hoya also beat Leija, who fought a lot of good fighters at Jr Lightweight, Lightweight and Jr Welter.He was never destroyed against anyone else like he was against De La Hoya.

Of course De La Hoya also beat Molina.

I have two questions for you:
1. Do you personally think that the buchanan-Duran fight was competitive?

2. Do you personally think that Molina should have got the decison against De La Hoya?
Hello Alp once again:

I asked you of one TRUE LIGHTWEIGHT that DLH ever beat at this weight and you mentioned RAFAEL RUELAS???

That guy was a true lightweight???...Ohhhh my Yah!!! I cannot believe this!!! Rafael Ruelas???

I looked at Ruelas resume before DLH and he beat tomato cans as well as guys that were waay past their pick. His title win??? Was it against Freddie Pendleton???? Another MEDIOCRE FIGHTER THAT GOT ROBBED BY RUELAS. Maybe Dan and Joe Goossen management company was the influence of this fight. RUELAS WAS NEVER A TRUE LIGHTWEIGHT!!!


Do not compare 50s opposition with today's or 90s time. Guys like Bud Smith and Lauro Salas were not good but at LEAST better than Ruelas and were TRUE LIGHTWEIGHTS.
DeJesus would have put this guy (Ruelas) in the floor, just like he did Duran twice. But this time the referee would have had to stop the fight, because Ruelas would have a beating in the 1st round. You mentioned that DeJesus wins in the first round were against TOMATO CANS, well Ruelas was a TOMATO CAN.

RUELAS NEVER BEAT A TRUE LIGHTWEIGHT, NEVER LESS A TOP NOTCH OPPONENT. His record was padded and protected because of the Goossens.

Many Puerto Ricans FEEL that Molina was ROBBED against DLH. A friend of mine, that is not Puerto Rican told me that DLH got a GIFT. And all said and done, Molina WAS NEVER A NATURAL LIGHTWEIGHT EITHER...He was a Jr lightweight champ. So that all tells me that DLH NEVER beat a TRUE LIGHTWEIGHT, and he was NOT a true all time great lightweight, not in the top 20.


As for Buchanan-Duran, I may say that it was not competitive at all. I give you that. Buchanan was getting a terrible beating. But we cannot judge one fight and say that a rematch would have been the same. Joe Louis got a beating by Max Schmeling. Louis won the rematch by spectacular fashion. Buchanan was holding his own in the latter rounds, but Duran's pressure that night was INCREDIBLE. And Buchanan proved to have a great chin that night, absorbing Duran's boms. Another lightweight would have gone to the floor and had to be counted to 10. That shows me how GOOD BUCHANAN WAS. A rematch probably would have been different, who knows, Buchanan was not beat up like Sanchez-Gomez or Duran-Moore.

I think Buchanan did enough at 135 to be considered a top lightweight. Also Laguna, Moseley, DeJesus and Petrolle.


Well alp, you got your views. But to say that Ruelas was a TRUE LIGHTWEIGHT IS LIKE SAYING THAT OLIVER MCCALL was great heavyweight champion.

Posted: 21 Sep 2006, 21:52
by torodecayey
what about my grandpa?-- he beat ambers and kid berg

Posted: 22 Sep 2006, 15:49
by Ambling Alp
Elmer - I didn't ask you what your friend thought of the Molina-De La Hoya fight. I asked you who you thought won. Have you even seen the De La Hoya -Molina fight yourself?
You will have a hard time finding 7 rounds that Molina won. 5 is pushing it.

As for Ruelas, I don't understand how you can call him a tomato can. As I have said before he was an all time great (I didn't list him in the top 50), but he was a respectable fighter. He beat Darrell Tyson, Rocky Lockridge, Paez. These may not beat great wins, but they are respectable.
And yes I consider Ruelas a legitimate lightweight. He had been fighting as a lightweight for 4 years when he fought De La Hoya. He even moved up to Jr Welter. In fact if he a total tomato cando you really think he would have lasted 9 rounds against Kosta Tzsyu?

Molina also fought many fights at lightweight and he fought at Jr Welterweight. Guys naturally outgrow their weight class. Fighters usually don't stay at a lower weight class especially in the last few years.

Well, if you want to count the fact that Duran didn't fight Buchanan against him, should we lower Duran's rank down from #1? :D

T

Posted: 22 Sep 2006, 19:45
by elmersalsa
Ambling Alp wrote:Elmer - I didn't ask you what your friend thought of the Molina-De La Hoya fight. I asked you who you thought won. Have you even seen the De La Hoya -Molina fight yourself?
You will have a hard time finding 7 rounds that Molina won. 5 is pushing it.

As for Ruelas, I don't understand how you can call him a tomato can. As I have said before he was an all time great (I didn't list him in the top 50), but he was a respectable fighter. He beat Darrell Tyson, Rocky Lockridge, Paez. These may not beat great wins, but they are respectable.
And yes I consider Ruelas a legitimate lightweight. He had been fighting as a lightweight for 4 years when he fought De La Hoya. He even moved up to Jr Welter. In fact if he a total tomato cando you really think he would have lasted 9 rounds against Kosta Tzsyu?

Molina also fought many fights at lightweight and he fought at Jr Welterweight. Guys naturally outgrow their weight class. Fighters usually don't stay at a lower weight class especially in the last few years.

Well, if you want to count the fact that Duran didn't fight Buchanan against him, should we lower Duran's rank down from #1? :D

T

Yeah, Ruelas lasted with Kostya Tyszu 9 rounds. Yeah, 9 rounds LOPSIDED. He probably did not want to KO him early enough. Ruelas beat a WASHED UP Rocky Lockdrige who was NEVER A TRUE LIGHTWEIGHT.
Darryl Tyson was not a lightweight, but a featherweight.
Paez was ANOTHER washed up featherweight and blown lightweight.
Like I have said before, Ruelas nor DLH have not beat a TRUE LIGHTWEIGHT. Buchanan, Laguna and DeJesus did beat TRUE LIGHTWEIGHTS the whole time they were there.

Molina fought most of his career at jr lightweight, Alp. Molina made about 8 title defenses of the IBF Jr Lightweight title. He is one of the top 20 Jr Lightweights in history, BUT NEVER A TRUE LIGHTWEIGHT.

I am going to see the Molina-DeLaHoya fight and I will tell you if DLH REALLY won. I am not going to put pride nor ignorance in this view. I will score it righteously. I will do that Alp. I will do that.


How can we lower Duran from #1? He was CLEARLY the greatest lightweight of all time. His record at lightweight was AWESOME. He won 42 fights at 135 and only lost 1, avenging it twice with spectacular fashion.

If that is the case, we should lower Ray Leonard a little bit in the welterweight rankings because he did not gave Duran, Hearns nor Benitez a rematch.

Alp, I give you respect. I do not have nothing against you my friend.

Posted: 26 Sep 2006, 13:30
by Ambling Alp
Elmer,
I think much of our disagreement concerns what is a blown up fighter. Certainly there are borderline cases if a guy is "blown up or not". However I feel that if a guy moves up in weight and wins a title you can't consider him "blown up" at that weight. (Maybe it's not his best weight, but nevertheless he isn't "blown up"). Also if a fighter is fighting at the weight for a few years he shouldn't be considered blownup at the heavier weight.
Most guys in the lower weight classes don't stay at the same weight calss their entire career. They naturally grow into a heavier weight class.

Ruelas was a lightweight for almost 4 years and was the lightweight champion when De La Hoya knocked him out. This isn't a borderline call. Ruelas was certainly a legitimate lightweight at the time.

A couple of guys that Ruelas beat shouldn't be considered "blown up" lightweights either. Darryl Tyson was a lightweight for many years when Ruelas beat him. Paez (another guy that De La Hoya destroyed) gave Whitaker a decent fight at lightweight before Ruelas beat him.

As for the Molina-DeLa Houa fight, let me know how you scored it after you see it. Score every round like a judge does.

As for Duran, I was just kidding about lowering his ranking becasue he didn't fight Buchanan again.