Posted: 21 Aug 2007, 12:15
Pundit- I have no idea why you think Fullmer dwarfed Basilio. They look almost the exact same size on film. Fullmer only outweighed him by 3 pounds and was only an inch and a half taller.
Basilio was no welterweight when Fullmer beat him. He had already several fights above welterweight and should easily been used to the weight by then.
Where is the evidence that Basilio was past it when he fought Fullmer? He wasn't old, had not declined in his fights leading up to the Fullmer fights, and fought like he always did in the Fullmer fights.
Just because Basilio didn't have many fights after he lost to Fullmer doesn't mean that was way past it when he fought Fullmer. Maybe the beatings Basilio took from Fullmer accerlated his retirement. Maybe Basilio realized that he was never going to be the middleweight champ again.
Doesn't Tunney beating Dempsey or Leonard's win over Hagler count for anything? Of course they do. It's not Fullmer's problem that Basilio didn't have many more fights after Fullmer beat him.
No, Fullmer wasn't a champ in two weight classes. This shouldn't be held against him. It shouldn't be held against a fighter if he stays at the same weight class their entire career. What did you expect him to do, move up to lightheavyweight?He was only 5'8. He would have been at a huge disadvantage if he would have tried to fight as a lightheavyweight.
Yes, Basilio deserves some credit for beating DeMarco for the welterweight title, and for winning the middleweight title. However that is just one of many factors that should be considered when rating Basilio.
As for mechanically rattling off boxrec stats- I don't understand your problem with looking up results on the database. It's silly not to look at a fighter's entire career when rating them. It's smart to get as much information as you can. They are records of what happened, not just a few fights that get shown over and over on TV. Of course they don't tell the whole story, but they are certainly important.
Using the boxrec database or some other database or a record book is very useful.
Maybe if Basilio's losses to ordinary fighters like Eddie Giosa,Lester Felton,Johnny Cesario,Ross Virgo etc. were shown on TV constantly you may think differently about Basilio. Just because fights aren't available on tape and/or aren't on TV doesn't mean they didn't happen.
Basilio was a great fighter but there were others that haven't been voted in yet who were better. Other fighters lost a lot less often than Basilio and had more impressive wins, including Fullmer. Basilio won less than 3/4 of his official results. It's certainly not absurd to think that Fullmer and many other fighters were better than Basilio; even if they don't have a few of their fights available on tape or on TV a lot.
Basilio was no welterweight when Fullmer beat him. He had already several fights above welterweight and should easily been used to the weight by then.
Where is the evidence that Basilio was past it when he fought Fullmer? He wasn't old, had not declined in his fights leading up to the Fullmer fights, and fought like he always did in the Fullmer fights.
Just because Basilio didn't have many fights after he lost to Fullmer doesn't mean that was way past it when he fought Fullmer. Maybe the beatings Basilio took from Fullmer accerlated his retirement. Maybe Basilio realized that he was never going to be the middleweight champ again.
Doesn't Tunney beating Dempsey or Leonard's win over Hagler count for anything? Of course they do. It's not Fullmer's problem that Basilio didn't have many more fights after Fullmer beat him.
No, Fullmer wasn't a champ in two weight classes. This shouldn't be held against him. It shouldn't be held against a fighter if he stays at the same weight class their entire career. What did you expect him to do, move up to lightheavyweight?He was only 5'8. He would have been at a huge disadvantage if he would have tried to fight as a lightheavyweight.
Yes, Basilio deserves some credit for beating DeMarco for the welterweight title, and for winning the middleweight title. However that is just one of many factors that should be considered when rating Basilio.
As for mechanically rattling off boxrec stats- I don't understand your problem with looking up results on the database. It's silly not to look at a fighter's entire career when rating them. It's smart to get as much information as you can. They are records of what happened, not just a few fights that get shown over and over on TV. Of course they don't tell the whole story, but they are certainly important.
Using the boxrec database or some other database or a record book is very useful.
Maybe if Basilio's losses to ordinary fighters like Eddie Giosa,Lester Felton,Johnny Cesario,Ross Virgo etc. were shown on TV constantly you may think differently about Basilio. Just because fights aren't available on tape and/or aren't on TV doesn't mean they didn't happen.
Basilio was a great fighter but there were others that haven't been voted in yet who were better. Other fighters lost a lot less often than Basilio and had more impressive wins, including Fullmer. Basilio won less than 3/4 of his official results. It's certainly not absurd to think that Fullmer and many other fighters were better than Basilio; even if they don't have a few of their fights available on tape or on TV a lot.